Key Takeaways
- Inmates at Kgosi Mampuru II remand centre are reportedly being charged R240 for a bunk bed, with the money diverted to an external “head honcho.”
- Those unable to pay are forced to sleep on the concrete floor of overcrowded, urine‑stained cells holding more than 30 men.
- Allegations include sexual coercion, with newcomers pressured to submit to sex in exchange for a sleeping space.
- The Department of Correctional Services acknowledges the claims as serious and has launched an investigation, though it did not directly address the sexual‑abuse accusations in its initial reply.
- Systemic problems such as contraband smuggling, chronic overcrowding (≈58 % nationwide), and insufficient bed capacity exacerbate the vulnerability of remand detainees.
Background of the Allegations
Kgosi Mampuru II, a remand facility in Tshwane that houses individuals awaiting trial or bail hearings, has come under scrutiny after two former detainees described a coercive “bed‑rental” scheme operating inside Cells C1 and C2. According to their accounts, an inmate who had appointed himself the cell’s “head honcho” demanded payment for a bunk bed, providing newcomers with a cellphone and bank details to arrange the transfer. Failure to pay resulted in being left on the filthy concrete floor, a condition described as inhumane and degrading.
First Detainee’s Testimony
A man arrested on 18 May for alleged theft of R980,000 recounted his experience after being transferred to Kgosi Mampuru on 20 May. He said he was instructed within hours of arrival to “buy a bed” for R240, which included a mattress. He contacted his wife, who made the payment and forwarded proof to the provided number. He spent the night in Cell C1 before being moved to Cell C2 the following morning, describing the environment as “real hell” and “the devil’s den.” He noted that inmates who accepted a bed became effectively bound to that space, and that the cell’s unofficial leader openly engaged in sexual activity with multiple partners, pressuring newcomers to submit. After refusing to be penetrated, he was relocated to another cell and released on 22 May, maintaining his innocence regarding the fraud charges.
Second Detainee’s Account
Another former inmate, held in Cell C1 in January while facing a hijacking charge, described his stay as “the worst experience of my life.” He reported suffering a severe psychotic episode during his detention, attributing the mental deterioration to the relentless stress of the extortion scheme, the lack of basic hygiene, and the pervasive fear of sexual victimisation. His testimony reinforces the pattern that the bed‑rental practice is not an isolated incident but a recurring feature of life in these particular cells.
Alleged Sexual Coercion
Both detainees emphasized that securing a bunk bed frequently came with an unspoken demand for sexual compliance. The self‑styled “head honcho” allegedly singled out those who resisted, using threats of continued floor‑sleeping or physical retaliation to enforce submission. The open nature of sexual acts within the cell—described as occurring “in numbers”—creates a hostile environment that violates inmates’ dignity and contravenes constitutional protections against cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment.
Departmental Response
Correctional Services spokesperson Singabakho Nxumalo confirmed that the allegations are under investigation, stating that the claims are “serious and warrant that an investigation be conducted.” He reiterated that standard operating procedures prohibit inmates from charging one another for basic necessities such as beds, toiletries, or essential supplies, which should be provided free of charge. While Nxumalo condemned the practice as “disturbing,” the department’s initial statement did not directly address the sexual‑coercion allegations, leaving a gap in the official response that advocacy groups have highlighted as needing clarification.
Contraband and Institutional Weaknesses
The presence of a contraband cellphone used to facilitate the payments underscores broader security failures within the correctional system. National Commissioner Makgothi Thubakgale reported in February that 312 disciplinary cases had been brought against officials for contraband smuggling, with 266 resolved, noting that banned items often enter facilities via visitors or corrupt staff. Although detection equipment is being rolled out, budget constraints limit its deployment, leaving gaps that enable schemes like the bed‑rental racket to flourish.
Overcrowding Statistics
National figures reveal a systemic overcrowding crisis: approximately 169,000 inmates occupy a system designed for 107,000 beds, translating to an occupancy rate of about 58 %. Remand detainees alone number roughly 62,000, a significant increase from 43,000 in 2014. Minister Pieter Groenewald has estimated the daily cost of holding a remand inmate at R463. A parliamentary reply based on February 2024 headcounts showed that none of the country’s 243 correctional facilities operated within its approved capacity, with 205 overcrowded; in Gauteng, 20 of 26 facilities exceeded their limits. MP Lungisani Shangase of the MKP characterised this overcrowding as an “assault on human dignity,” noting that nearly a third of inmates are remand detainees held for months without conviction or a court appearance.
Inspection Findings and Broader Implications
The Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services reported handling 13,676 inmate complaints in a single quarter of 2024, including numerous accounts of inmates sleeping on mattresses placed directly on the floor due to bed shortages. The same inspection noted leaking toilets and roofs, broken taps and showers at Kgosi Mampuru II, further deteriorating living conditions. These findings suggest that the bed‑rental extortion is symptomatic of deeper infrastructural and managerial deficiencies that jeopardize inmate health, safety, and fundamental rights.
Conclusion
The testimonies from Kgosi Mampuru II reveal a disturbing convergence of extortion, sexual coercion, and systemic neglect within South Africa’s remand prison system. While the Department of Correctional Services has pledged an investigation, the persistence of overcrowding, contraband infiltration, and inadequate basic services points to the need for comprehensive reform. Ensuring that every detainee receives a bed, sanitation, and protection from abuse—not as a privilege to be purchased but as a right—must become a priority if the correctional system is to uphold its constitutional mandate and preserve human dignity.