WARNING: This is Version 1 of my old archive, so Photos will NOT work and many links will NOT work. But you can find articles by searching on the Titles. There is a lot of information in this archive. Use the SEARCH BAR at the top right. Prior to December 2012; I was a pro-Christian type of Conservative. I was unaware of the mass of Jewish lies in history, especially the lies regarding WW2 and Hitler. So in here you will find pro-Jewish and pro-Israel material. I was definitely WRONG about the Boeremag and Janusz Walus. They were for real.
Original Post Date: 2009-03-05 Time: 04:00:10 Posted By: Jan
Correctional Services Minister Ngconde Balfour will review Schabir Shaik’s release on medical parole only if he receives “hard evidence” that the fraudster is not severely ill.
A top Correctional Services official on Wednesday slammed as “cynical” and “irrelevant” SABC reports that a January 13 medical test performed on ANC president Jacob Zuma’s former financial adviser did not show that he was in the final stages of a terminal illness.
“We regard these reports as a cynical attempt to force the department to disclose the details of Mr Shaik’s private medical reports and thereby violate his rights, as well as doctor-patient confidentiality.
“Pressure is increasingly being brought to bear on us in this regard… but we are not prepared to do that (disclose the exact nature of Shaik’s medical condition),” Chief Deputy Commissioner of Correctional Services Teboho Motseki told The Star on Wednesday.
| ‘The minister has looked at the report’ |
While not commenting directly on the existence or correctness of the January 13 test on Shaik, Motseki stressed that the Correctional Services Act required parole boards to consider the reports of medical doctors, not institutions. This, he said, meant the reported January 13 test results were irrelevant to the parole board’s decision on Shaik.
Shaik, who served two years and four months of his 15-year sentence for fraud and corruption involving Zuma, was released from prison on Tuesday and returned to his family in an ambulance.
Balfour’s spokesperson, Manelisi Wolela, on Wednesday confirmed that the Shaik medical parole decision would not be referred to the Parole Review Board.
“The minister has looked at the report, applied his mind and decided that the matter is correct,” Wolela said.
He stressed that only “hard evidence” would persuade Balfour that the parole board’s decision was not correct.
| ‘Accusations are not a basis for review’ |
“Many people are making claims, but with seemingly no basis… If they have evidence to show that the decision was wrong, they must bring it. But accusations are not a basis for review.”
South African Human Rights Commission chairperson Jody Kollapen on Wednesday asked that, in the light of the public interest around Shaik’s parole and “inconsistency” around the granting of medical parole, the decision to grant Shaik parole should be reviewed.
While Balfour has seemingly rebuffed the suggestion, Wolela said Kollapen was welcome to view the parole board’s report on Shaik at the Correctional Services Department’s offices. This, he added, would naturally be under strict conditions of confidentiality.
Speaking to The Star on Wednesday night, Kollapen questioned whether the department’s invitation to him “would really serve any purpose”.
“The commission has not specifically taken issue with the granting of medical parole to Mr Shaik… but we are concerned about the inconsistency in policy implementation in the granting of medical parole. This is about accountability to the broader public.”
Balfour found time to read Shaik’s application for parole, but more politically sensitive decisions still wait on his desk, writes Louise Flanagan.
An apartheid hit squad killer who applied for parole in late 2007, Butana Almond Nofemela, has been trying for months to get the minister to make a decision on his release.
This week his lawyer, Julian Knight, said Nofemela was still in jail, awaiting the minister’s decision regarding his parole.
Nofemela is eligible to apply for parole after serving 20 years of a life sentence. He has now been in jail for 21-and-a-half years.
Knight has previously said that Balfour’s failure to make a decision was political interference in the parole process.
Nofemela is serving a life sentence for the murder of a Brits farmer, Johannes Hendrik Lourens, during an armed robbery.
While in jail, he avoided the gallows by confessing to involvement in the police hit squad murder of anti-apartheid activist Griffiths Mxenge, a crime for which he received amnesty.
Nofemela’s parole application was approved by the local prison committee in November 2007.
In February last year, it was approved by the National Council for Correctional Services (NCCS) and sent to Balfour for final approval – but nothing happened.
In December, Knight won a Pretoria High Court order that instructed Balfour to make a decision on the prisoner’s parole within 10 court days. One day before the court’s deadline, Balfour sent the parole decision back to the NCCS – avoiding making a decision.
Instead, Balfour queried some of the documents, including the age of some documents, and said Nofemela should undergo the department’s pre-release programmes.
The NCCS will discuss Balfour’s queries at its meeting later this month.
At the time, Knight said the age of the documents indicated how long the department had taken to process the application, and that confirmation that Nofemela had undergone the programmes was included in the file.