Convicted underworld kingpin Radovan Krejčíř has once again thrust South Africa’s correctional system into the spotlight after the Pretoria high court ordered prison authorities to provide him with a laptop and full internet access for study purposes.
Judge Rean Strydom ruled on June 3 that the Czech-born inmate, who is serving 35 years for kidnapping and attempted murder, must be granted access to his personal computer and study material while incarcerated at Kgosi Mampuru II’s C-Max prison.
The ruling followed his urgent application in which he argued that the department of correctional services had unlawfully denied him the right to further his education.
The court found that refusing Krejčíř’s request was unconstitutional in light of the Constitutional Court’s recent decision in Minister of Justice and Correctional Services v Ntuli which declared a 2007 prison policy barring personal computers for inmates studying through accredited institutions invalid.
Strydom stressed that “no distinction is drawn between any specific inmate or correctional centre” in the Constitutional Court’s order, meaning even prisoners in maximum-security facilities such as C-Max are entitled to use laptops for educational purposes.
Under the order, Krejčíř must surrender the laptop for inspection at any time and will forfeit the privilege if he breaches prison rules.
Krejčíř’s legal battles in South Africa stretch back more than a decade.
He first appeared in the Johannesburg magistrate’s court in 2011 on a fraud charge involving a bogus cancer diagnosis used to claim millions from an insurance company.
Two years later he was arrested in connection with the kidnapping and torture of Bheki Lukhele, whose brother allegedly disappeared with a consignment of drugs tied to Krejčíř’s network.
His trial lasted years and exposed chilling details of his criminal empire. He was convicted in 2015 and sentenced to 35 years in February 2016.
Beyond South Africa, Krejčíř has also been sentenced in absentia in Czechia to 15 years for fraud, tax evasion and plotting to murder a customs official.
South African courts have ruled he may be extradited once he completes his local sentence.
Since then, Krejčíř has repeatedly returned to court challenging prison conditions and demanding access to medical treatment and study privileges.
The judgment has fuelled heated debate online with many South Africans questioning whether the constitution protects criminals at the expense of justice.
In South Africa, prisoners’ right to access personal laptops for educational purposes is grounded in the constitution, specifically section 29, which guarantees the right to further education.
This right was reinforced by the recent Constitutional Court’s ruling where the court emphasised that DCS has a duty to facilitate access to education for incarcerated individuals provided it does not compromise security.
Consequently, inmates registered with recognised tertiary institutions and who require a computer for their studies are entitled to use personal computers in their cells, albeit without internet access.
These devices must be available for inspection by prison authorities at any time.
This landmark decision aligns with international standards such as the UN’s Mandela Rules, which advocate for prisoners’ access to education and the necessary resources to support it.
One Facebook user, Obakeng Moalusi, wrote: “The same system that denied Thabo Bester a laptop and a cellphone in his cell. What kind of a country is this?”
Another commentator, Shalom Hasaan, argued for stricter controls.: “They should have let him work only from a desktop in a public space and under supervision and at specified times. He can’t be given privacy.”
Other people on social media expressed their concern saying the case highlights ongoing tension in South Africa’s legal system which is balancing inmates’ constitutional rights with public concerns over fairness and security.
TimesLIVE
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.