Former ANC provincial chairperson John Block was portrayed as a big-hearted and model inmate during an urgent application for the Upington Correctional Services supervisory board to grant him a parole hearing.
FORMER ANC provincial chairperson John Block was portrayed as a big-hearted and model inmate during an urgent application for the Upington Correctional Services supervisory board to grant him a parole hearing.
The matter was heard in the Northern Cape High Court this week.
Block is currently serving a 15-year sentence at Upington Correctional Centre after he was convicted of corruption and money laundering in relation to multimillion-rand leases for government offices that were concluded with the Trifecta group of companies.
His legal representative, advocate Tembeka Ngcukaitobi, told the court on July 31 that his client had never been charged with misconduct at Upington prison.
ALSO READ: Hero’s welcome for ‘the Boss’
“He collaborated with the Premier’s Office to donate soccer jerseys and balls to the facility, while the Department of Correctional Services did not have the funds or resources,” said Ngcukaitobi.
“It is logical – he turned to his friends, who wanted to help and contribute towards the health of the prison population.”
Ngcukaitobi believed that Block was unduly being kept behind bars as he promoted social responsibility and human development at the facility.
ALSO READ: John Block granted bail
“The centre was running short of teachers and Block offered to tutor inmates free of charge for the past four years. It is outrageous that there are no teachers at the prison.”
He stated that Block had “decided to do something”, where he fixed the roof of the prison that was cracking, windows that were falling apart and sewage that was “everywhere”.
“He still has a farm and he employed an ex-prisoner as a security guard. This is truly exceptional.”
ALSO READ: Supporters call for Block to be freed
Ngcukaitobi added that the Xhosa signage outside the main gate of Upington Correctional Centre was changed after Block alerted them in 2019 that it was causing some confusion.
“It could have jeopardised the safety of inmates. In English and Afrikaans it correctly prohibited members of the public from entering the facility while the Xhosa translation meant that entry was permitted. Xhosa is ambidextrous, where one word can have five different meanings.”
He believed that Block should not be deprived of his liberty.
“He is serving a 15-year sentence for one act of corruption while two Nigerian inmates who were convicted of rape and sexual assault were released.”
Ngcukaitobi stated that the head of the Upington Correctional Centre at the time, Mr Ndlovu, appointed Mr Du Plessis as the investigator for Block’s application for special remission on his sentence.
“Ndlovu and Du Plessis were involved in various altercations where their animosity resulted in bias towards my client. Du Plessis stated that Block did not qualify for parole as he ‘had not placed his life in danger’.
“Block complained that Du Plessis had failed to interview him while he had also not appeared before the parole board before the decision was made to dismiss his application.”
Ngcukaitobi argued that Block should be granted parole after handing himself over on November 27, 2018.
“There is no reason to keep him incarcerated, as he already served his minimum detention period.”
Ngcukaitobi stated that despite being informed that his name was included on the list of offenders who were eligible for early release in May 2020, he was later advised that he did not qualify.
“They must explain how this happened, as they never admitted that his name was included on the list in error. It must have been due to political interference.”
He added that his client had waited four months for a response from the Department of Correctional Services after lodging an appeal against the decision of the parole board with the national commissioner on February 27.
“They are supposed to respond within five days after an appeal was dismissed.”
Ngcukaitobi objected to a proposal that Block be held personally liable for the legal costs.
The legal representative for the Department of Correctional Services, advocate Maponya, pointed out that if Block was able to employ an ex-offender at his farm, he was capable of paying his own legal costs.
He added that offenders only qualified for a special remission if they reported drug and gun smuggling, an escape, attack or assault.
Maponya indicated that while Block was commended for facilitating the donation of the soccer kits and for providing employment to an ex-offender on his farm, this did not constitute grounds for a special remission.
“An inmate must have risked their lives at the facility where they are incarcerated to qualify for a special remission.”
He stated that Block could only be considered for parole on May 26, 2025, where the Covid-19 dispensation had reduced his sentence to 13 years.
Maponya said that if there was any animosity, Ndlovu would not have appointed Du Plessis as the investigator.
“There was no bias in his findings and Du Plessis could only make recommendations. The final decision lies with the parole board. Block should have exhausted all internal remedies, instead of rushing to court. He has to prove exceptional circumstances in order to be released. ”
Northern Cape High Court Judge Sibongile Nxumalo acknowledged that Block’s acts of generosity in supplying the correctional centre with soccer kits could be misconstrued as an abuse of his influence.
He added that the list of offenders under consideration for parole, where Block’s name was included, appeared to be a preliminary list.
“He made bold statements and profound, ingenious remarks in his affidavit. Where did he obtain the list of all inmates who were being considered for parole? As a law graduate, Block is legally trained. Maybe he can come and explain.”
Nxumalo reserved judgment.
