[ad_1]
Andile Lungisa served at least 91 days of a two-year prison sentence after being convicted of assault with intent to cause serious bodily injury for striking Councilman District Attorney Rano Kayser on the head with a glass water jug. . (Photo: Theo Jeptha)
Former Nelson Mandela Bay councilor Andile Lungisa served just 91 days of his two-year prison sentence before being released on parole on Tuesday. Questions surrounding his release have touched a vein of mistrust in South Africa’s criminal justice system.
Shortly after his release from Port Elizabeth’s North End Prison, former ANC Nelson Mandela Bay Councilor Andile Lungisa, flanked by ANC members, including Des van Rooyen and Supra Mahumapelo, called to President Cyril Ramaphosa to stop the “attack” on Jacob Zuma.
“I went to jail because we fought the district attorney,” Lungisa said.
He got out of jail the same way he came in, surrounded by fellow supporters, and used his criminal conviction to further his political goals, while still feeling remorse for the crime he committed.
Lungisa served at least 91 days of a two-year prison sentence after he was convicted of assault with intent to cause serious bodily injury for striking Councilman District Attorney Rano Kayser on the head with a glass water jug. during an altercation at the Nelson Mandela Bay council in 2018.
Unresolved questions surrounding his parole have raised issues about the effectiveness of the justice system and the influence of the executive on prison sentences.
Lungisa went to jail after the Supreme Court of Appeals in September 2020 denied him permission to appeal a ruling from the Eastern Cape Superior Court that sentenced him to three years in prison, with a one-year suspension.
In a statement released Tuesday, Department of Correctional Services spokesman Singabakho Nxumalo explained that Lungisa served at least 16 days in jail after he was convicted in May 2018 before being released pending appeal.
It explained that Lungisa was eligible for parole under section 73 (7) (a) of the Correctional Services Act, read in conjunction with section 276 (1) (i) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which essentially converts Prisoners who have served one sixth of their sentence are eligible for parole.
Lungisa also benefited from Ramaphosa’s December 2019 announcement of a 12-month waiver of sentences for qualified convicts.
By breaking it down, Lungisa’s effective two-year sentence was cut in half by the president’s referral, which experts agree he qualified, reducing his sentence to 12 months. The provision of a sixth would mean that he would only have to serve two months, which he did, to qualify for parole.
That means his release is suspicious. Generally, an offender is eligible for release after serving half of the sentence.
But the court did not sentence Lungisa under 276 (1) (i) of the Criminal Procedure Act (CPA), the one-sixth rule, and Nxumalo did not respond to questions from Daily maverick as to why it was applied in the Lungisa case.
“He was sentenced by the magistrate to direct prison. If an offender benefits from section 276 (1) (i), the sentencing court will make that clear. In any case, the magistrate made it clear that direct incarceration was appropriate due to the violent nature of the crime, ”said Clare Ballard, head of the Lawyers for Human Rights Penal Reform Program.
“That means his release is suspicious. Generally, an offender is eligible to be released after serving half the sentence, “he added.
Professor Lukas Muntingh, co-founder and coordinator of the Africa Criminal Justice Reform Project at the Dullah Omar Institute at the University of the Western Cape, agreed that Lungisa had not been convicted under 276 (1) (i) , which he asked the state to clarify, but believed he would have been eligible for parole anyway.
Muntingh said that Lungisa was sentenced to two effective years in prison and since inmates are generally eligible for parole after serving half of their sentence, Lungisa could be eligible for parole after serving 12 months. But because the president’s remission took a year off that sentence, the former ANC regional leader was essentially eligible for parole from day one.
South Africa is running out of time
Nxumalo did not respond to questions about who granted Lungisa parole. Muntingh said that a parole board rather than the prison manager should have considered the matter, because Lungisa was sentenced to three years in prison, with a one-year suspension.
Without Ramaphosa’s referral, Lungisa would still be in jail. The state announced new efforts to free certain non-violent offenders and reduce prison overcrowding during the Covid-19 pandemic.
“I think it comes at a cost to the criminal justice system and the courts when the president can so radically alter a court decision,” said Muntingh, who questioned “the possible permutations and outcomes” of early releases.
Lungisa’s release sparked a debate on social media about the effectiveness of the justice system from both Lungisa’s supporters and detractors, showing deep mistrust in the system’s ability to hold criminals accountable. From different angles, cases were cited to show that the privileged are given an easy ride, with little regard for the facts.
Johan Steyn was last week sentenced to house arrest and community service for attempted murder of a security guard. The Supreme Court of Appeals paid out two men previously convicted of killing a teenager in Coligny. Nelspruit Magistrates Court relaxed bail conditions for a former provincial ANC MEC accused of raping his daughters, so that he could resume his political work.
What prevents crime is the security of arrest and conviction. We are failing at that. The issue of punishment is practically unrelated to crime and violence prevention.
The most recent The South African Crime Victims Statistics Survey detailing levels of trust in public institutions found that only 15.5% of people fully trust the police and 21.4% fully trust the courts. It found that 63.5% trust the courts and 47.7% trust the police.
Gareth Newham, who heads the Institute for Security Studies’ Justice and Violence Prevention Program, said many South Africans were likely relieved to see Lungisa go to jail after seeing other politicians evade charges. Lungisa’s attack was filmed on camera and now his early release may seem like an unjust subversion of justice.
Ballard said mistrust is appropriate but misplaced with regard to punishment, as punishment has little to do with crime levels.
“What prevents crime is the security of arrest and conviction. We are failing at that. The issue of punishment is practically unrelated to crime and violence prevention, ”he said.
Lungisa still plans to appeal his conviction to the Constitutional Court. To further complicate your motives and questions about the justice system, the Eastern Cape Superior Court granted He was released on bail in September, pending his appeal to ConCourt, but decided to remain in prison, reportedly to finish his rehabilitation programs.
Lungisa must now serve the remainder of his sentence under the community corrections system, but it is unclear what conditions will be imposed. DM
