Chapter 9 - Parole - South African Government Information

Whilst it is appreciated that a prisoner does not have a right to parole, it is clear
that the decision to refuse or grant parole should meet the requirements of
fairness as enshrined in our Constitution.
After taking into consideration all of the abovementioned factors, it is the
Commission’s view, which Mr Wilkins shares, that the prisoner Mr Hlongwane
should have been released on parole after serving half of his sentence, namely,
on 3 December 2003. There is evidence to support such an opinion, namely:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
he was a first offender,
he had a good support system,
there were no rehabilitation programme reports; and
he had adapted to prison properly.
All of these factors support his release on parole.
Although there are Department of Correctional Services guidelines as to when
people should be released, the Act does not specify the minimum period that
must be served by such a prisoner. In the circumstances, there is no basis for not
applying discretion as a Parole Board and therefore not releasing a person after
they have served half their sentence, as long as it is applied judiciously. The
Departmental regulations are merely guidelines and the Act would be supreme to
the manner in which one applies oneself in giving parole. This is one aspect that
is missed by Departmental officials in their consideration of parole. Even
deserving cases like that of Mr Hlongwane are treated in the manner the
Department recommends in its guidelines and the Act is ignored. 13
13
The guidelines of policy pertaining to release of sentenced offenders 1/8/B – Penalization
factors: applicable in Parole Board and delegated officials signed by Director Offender
Policy, F.J. Venter dated 23 April 1998. (Annexure ‘C’ to Pretoria Exhibit “CCC”).
480