Sexual violence in South African
men’s correctional centres:
key issues
Presentation to Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services,
14 April 2010
Sasha Gear
Background in Brief
CSVR is an NGO working broadly to prevent violence,
heal its effects and build sustainable peace through
research, pilot interventions & advocacy. Celebrated
20th Anniversary in 2009.
Penal reform work has been a consistent feature:
(policy, staff training, holistic interventions with young
offenders)
• Work on sexual violence in prison (SVIP) began in
2001.
• Initially mainly research to gain understanding of
nature & circumstances of sex and sexual violence
happening in men’s prisons.
• “Daai Ding” – (qualitative) on dynamics of SV in men’s prisons.
•
Boksburg Correctional Centre – survey (juvenile inmates’
experiences of violence and sexual violence, officials’
responses to violence, HIV-related knowledge and practice)
• Now in early stages of research on best practice &
gaps in staff responses to violence.
Range of interventions
• Awareness raising workshops, publications
presentations – with civil society stakeholders, DCS
(various levels), inmates and oversight bodies.
• Collaborations, cross-learnings with other local and
international organisations (like Just Detention
International [JDI]).
• Trainings on sexual violence & sexual health in prison.
o Very recently (March 2010) completed a 4 day training
with 30 members of staff drawn from Modderbee, Nigel,
Devon (the 2nd of it’s kind)
o Conducted and/or collaborated (with JDI) in range of
trainings with other prison staff & Judicial
Inspectorate’s visitors & coordinators
• With JDI, developed Draft Policy on Sexual Violence
(2009).
Engaging DCS
• From early on CSVR engaged DCS on the issue
(launch of Anti-Rape Strategy, feeding in to then Task
Team, raising funds for prevention pilot projects, further
DCS research, DCS seminar presentations…).
• It has however been an ongoing struggle to attempt to
get DCS to pay the issue the attention it deserves.
o Personnel & leadership changes, restructurings,
bureaucracy, lack of clear prioritisation and follow-through
have all played a role.
o Unclear why exactly: - as through the years, there’s been
clear endorsement from sections of DCS leadership (most
notably Commissioner Peterson in 2008 who highlighted it
as key issue – invited civil society scrutiny & support - and
instructed senior management to act)
o Cautiously optimistic in view of DCS meeting this week –
but will require concerted and continuous dedication
& monitoring to ensure this initiative doesn’t
befall same fate.
prison rape: a common scenario
Prison rape frequently occurs when a newly-arrived inmate
accepts food, drugs or protection from another prisoner
who pretends to be concerned for the usually-terrified and
overwhelmed newcomer. The newly-arrived inmate will
most often assume that this is simply a gesture of support.
However, according to the ideas and ways of doing things
that are accepted and endorsed by the inmate power
structures (the dominant inmate culture), by eating the
food, or smoking the cigarette a debt has now been
created. The new naïve offender will only later learn that
he is expected to pay back this debt with sex. And when he
tries to refuse, he will learn that he has no choice in the
matter.
•
The scenario shows up vulnerability of the new firsttime offender who is oblivious of unwritten ‘rules’ of
inmate culture.
• He has no idea of the supposed “debt” he’s
been tricked into by accepting food,
cigarette.
vulnerability factors in sexual violence
o
first-time offender unfamiliar with
unwritten “rules” lack “prison suss” (easily
tricked into sex “debt” by “friendly” inmate)
o
physically weak / not prepared to use
violence
o
thought to have committed “sissy crime” (non
violent)
o
“good looking”, “pretty”, youthful
o
poor – economically needy (don’t get visitors)
o
gay, transgendered
o
mentally disabled
But ultimately anyone can become a victim.
Inmate culture: Imposed “woman-hood”
• victims of sexual violence perceived as “women” by
inmate culture.
• forced sexual penetration believed to demolish
manhood.
“We are all criminals in here and if I say you are a
criminal, that means I respect you. But if you have
had sex done to you even the criminal is now gone
and you are now a woman… There is nothing we
can do for you and we don’t care. When you walk
past people want to touch you or threaten to rape
you.”
(young offender)
Forced prison “marriages”
• “women” taken by “men” (perpetrators) in forced
“marriages”.
• “marriages” = long-term relationships of sexual
abuse.
• supported by gang practices, ranks & rituals but not
exclusive to gangs, not endorsed by
all gang members.
Hidden nature of sexual violence
in inmate culture
“Marriage”– disguising violence
dominant pattern of sexual relationship
• The “Marriage” definition legitimises & normalises
violence & abuse contained
• Modelled on dominant heterosexual relationships
outside, serves to make seem acceptable:
•
“just like marriages outside”
•
“you can’t rape your wife”
• Disappear violence
•
o
Perpetrators become “husband”, “men”
o
Victims become “women”, “wives”
Distance “homosexuality” vs other
(consensual) patterns of sexual interaction
that are outlawed by inmate culture.
Stigma and victim blaming
• Victims blamed for “letting” selves be “turned” into
women, “asking for it”.
“You can never allow another man
to come on top of you if you do not
like it.”
(young offender)
• Blaming works to legitimise sexual violence: perpetrator
supposedly done nothing wrong.
In a CSVR survey (Juveniles, Gauteng, 2007; N=311):
• 5 respondents reported having forced another to
have sex in BYC, while –
• 17 had tricked / manipulated / threatened another to
have sex.
* points to definitional challenge:
forced sex not seen as such.
Official practices also hide sexual
violence
Confusion in policy vacuum
• Lack of clear DCS policy and procedures on sexual
violence confuses staff & inmates and contributes to
confusion between sex & violence, which in turn
contributes to the lack of recognition of victims of rape.
• Use of terms “sodomy” and “homosexuality” show up
and add to the confusion
o incorrectly used interchangeably with rape / forced sex ;
o apparent failure to distinguish forced from consensual sex.
Note:
“Sodomy” simply refers to anal sex
which only becomes a crime when it is
forced, and then becomes rape.
• Contributes to homophobia, risky sex practices,
invisibility of male rape
Official practice hides sexual violence (cont…)
• Rape is literally disappeared from DCS records of
violence
o No category for rape / sexual assault in statisticgathering systems.
o So if someone is raped, this is captured under the
general category of “assault”.
Lack of staff capacity & victim support
The absence of language re rape is mirrored in lack of
support for victims:
• very limited capacity, staff not given relevant
skills/guidelines.
Lack of staff capacity & victim support (contin).
o Recent CSVR training with Modderbee Staff was
their first such exposure to issue. (Very well
received and calls for more)
o All staff need this as part of basic training.
While members with best intentions are hindered by
lack of skills and clear policy to deal with sexual
violence, others are themselves involved directly in the
sex-trade of inmates and/or taking bribes to turn a blind
eye to abuses and not act on reports.
Problematics of reporting assaults
Critical component of victim support and addressing
the problem more generally, is a context where
(potential) victims and witnesses report violence.
Problematics of reporting (contin)…
In CSVR survey (Juvenile institution, Gauteng, 2007; N=311),

58% most recent assaults (general rather than
sexual) not reported.
 24% where not reported because didn’t think would
make difference.

20% afraid to report.
Sexual violence is especially sensitive (stigma and
likelihood of further victimisation) and even less likely to
be reported without meaningful institutional support.
Inmates surveyed were more pessimistic regarding staff
responses to sexual violence, & moreso as spent longer
in Centre.

26% (>1/4) who had been in prison more than 1
year agreed/strongly agreed that:
“Most officials won’t do anything to stop
it if they know about a prisoner being
forced to have sex against his will.”
(Increased as been there longer.)
Also influencing lack of staff capacity
and motivation:
•
Sense of helplessness and resignation - that SV is not
something can do anything much about, but rather “part
of prison life”. (lack of skills & awareness)
•
Intense fear, denial and stigma amongst prison staff
re HIV-AIDS (Muntingh, & Tapscott 2009), and
homophobia stifle their ability to engage with the issues
of SV and sexual health more generally (and in their
personal lives too).
Overview of key learnings:
•
Sexual violence in correctional centres is intimately linked to
sexual- & gender-based violence taking place between men
and women in society more generally.
•
SVIP endorses the most destructive ideas of what it means
to be “man” as it endorses views that “women” are
fundamentally inferior and slaves to the sexual (and other)
desires of ‘men’.
•
As such, SVIP contributes to further violence, both in prison
and when prisoners return to society.
•
Remains unaddressed and also subject of resignation (“part
of prison life”).
•
But ensuring the safety of inmates is a clear and
fundamental obligation of DCS. It is also an essential starting
point for the current aspirational vision of rehabilitation
(which can’t go far without it).
•
Also essential to ensuring that inmates are not further
brutalised in prison– which has the opposite effect of
rehabilitation.
Key learnings contin
• Inmate’s safety and care should then be the first
priority – especially in our current context of limited
resources and overcrowding.
•
SV is part of inmate culture and perpetrated much
more widely than by “sex offenders” - need a
broader, multi-faceted approach.
• Consensual sex is also taking place – but lots of
violence occurs in forced relationships which staff &
inmates may see as ‘consensual’ but which are
actually coercive. (need to raise awareness on
forced “marriages”).
• Critical sexual health issues pertinent to both forced
and consensual sex.
o Dangerous misperceptions lead to risky and
abusive behaviours (eg. masturbation is harmful;
vaseline is effective lubricant [it’s not – it
damages condoms!]).
o Condom access + need for water-based
lubricants
o
“Interrupted” access of inmates to health/ social
workers (mediated by correctional officers,
sometimes divisions between types of staff)
Key learnings (contin)
•
Single biggest need is clear policy and procedures on how
to prevent and respond to sexual violence in CCs.
Note: while our research focus has been on men’s prisons,
most issues equally pertinent to women’s prisons where
there is similar and great need.
•
JDI will outline the necessary components of this, but to
mention 2 that need highlighting in our current context:
o Violence prevention strategy needs to include occupying
inmates with meaningful activity. Inter alia, this provides
opportunities for inmates to express a sense of personal
power & respect, gain a sense of belonging (which
decreases likelihood of them turning to violence to gain
the same.)
Note: Alarming that changes to staff schedules have not
translated into more unlock. Rather appears to be reduction
in inmate activity on visits to CC.
o Lack of disciplinary options within DCS for perpetrators
(even more serious in AT facilities), and problems with
SAPS criminal cases – why are there no/so few
convictions? (anecdotal evidence – in year, 13
cases reported, not one conviction)
Finally,
Our research with juveniles points to the substantial
impact that prison experiences are having on their
sense of themselves as ‘men’. Similarly, we found
that they’d gotten much of what they knew about sex
from their in prison experiences – even when they’d
only served relatively short periods. This
underscores the importance of prison experiences
for inmates’ development and sense of self, which
makes it all the more urgent that we ensure they are
not further brutalised through their experiences
inside.
www.csvr.org.za
sgear@csvr.org.za