EDITORIAL | SA’s parole system in desperate need of rehabilitation

In May, SA celebrated when convicted rapist Sello Abram Mapunya, who raped and robbed 56 women in Tshwane over a five-year period, was jailed for no fewer than 1,088 years. It felt like a victory: finally, a man who ruined too many lives will be locked away from society forever. 

But that forever is not really forever, as several families whose loved ones were victims of horrific crimes recently discovered. Leigh Visser’s brother Warren was killed in the Sizzler’s massacre in Cape Town in 2003. He was 23 years old at the time and was bound, had his throat slit, was shot and then set alight. Eight other men were killed in this unthinkable crime about which one thought dominates: throw away the key. His killer, Adam Woest, got nine life sentences. Yet Visser has been informed by the department of correctional services that he now qualifies for parole.

Visser, who now lives in Canada, was so traumatised by her brother’s death that she only recently told her husband about it. The possibility of Woest being released on parole has also spurred her into speaking about it publicly and petitioning President Cyril Ramaphosa. “We never fathomed this was possible. When you hear nine life sentences you don’t imagine them coming out. It’s insane,” she told Sunday Times Daily.

There is a distinction between a criminal incapable of rehabilitation and a prison system lacking the tools to enable rehabilitation.

Visser is not alone; she has teamed up with Roxanne van Eck – whose policeman father was shot 52 times by armed robbers – and Rob Matthews, whose daughter Leigh was kidnapped and murdered a day after she turned 21. The petition to Ramaphosa has garnered nearly 10,000 signatures. Part of it reads: “Mr President, I ask that you look into the revisions of the Correctional Services Act, that allows mass murderers like Adam Woest, serial rapists and killers to walk the streets of a country plagued by heinous crime. Change the laws that allow these menaces to society the possibility of early parole.”

At the moment, our law allows that prisoners be considered for parole after serving at least half of the sentence imposed by the court, unless a court stipulated otherwise. Also, anyone who has served 25 years in jail must be considered for parole, no matter how long the sentence period is. 

The latter part of the law is contentious. It stands to reason that if a judge saw it fit to send an offender to prison for the rest of his life, the crime was so serious that the public would be unsafe if the criminal were released back onto the streets. This is not to say the principles behind parole are wrong. The possibility of the early release of offenders is meant as an incentive for prisoners to rehabilitate themselves while incarcerated – the ultimate goal for a well-functioning society. 

It is the task of the parole board to decide how to balance the conflicting interests of  victim and offender, and it is a complicated juggling act. Unfortunately in SA there are too many reports of prisoners committing further crimes after being released on parole, eroding confidence in the system. Just in the past week there were three news reports of parolees committing crimes: a North West rape-accused committing a similar crime, a convicted stock thief caught stealing livestock and a convicted murderer caught hijacking a car.

There is a distinction between a criminal incapable of rehabilitation and a prison system  lacking the tools to enable rehabilitation. The petition started by Leigh Visser should be food for thought for our leaders. Not only should our lawmakers consider a change to better protect citizens from heinous criminals; our correctional services decisionmakers also need to do an honest review of the weaknesses in the current rehabilitation system.