Proposed bail fund sparks debate among lawmakers and civil society
The proposed Bail Fund seeks to alleviate the plight of low-risk detainees, but experts warn of the need for stringent oversight and community engagement.
Image: Independent Newspapers Archives
A proposed Bail Fund to assist awaiting trial detainees who cannot afford low bail amounts has drawn mixed reactions from civil society, lawmakers, and justice experts, all of whom broadly support the concept but warn that public safety, accountability, and careful criteria will be critical.
The Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services (JICS) presented the idea to Parliament's Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services this week, describing the fund as a non-state resource that would provide bail assistance for low-risk detainees. These are individuals who courts have already assessed and are deemed fit for release but who remain incarcerated simply because they cannot afford bail often amounts below R1 000.
JICS told MPs that as of June 2025, there were 2 613 detainees in South African correctional centres who had been granted bail under R1 000 but remained behind bars. The inspectorate stated, “They are prisoners of poverty.”
A pilot programme for the fund is set to launch in the Western Cape and will exclude those accused of violent offences, including gender-based violence. Detainees eligible for support will be those deemed not to be a flight risk, not a danger to the public or witnesses, and who have a fixed address.
Committee chairperson Kgomotso Anthea Ramolobeng however said in some instances it was not a question of affordability, but rather families had chosen not to pay even low bail amounts.
“Our impression was that if they were inside a detention centre, they were out of the family’s hair. We found that in many cases, families of juvenile detainees refused to pay even low bail, saying the youths had caused too much mischief in the community.”
She stressed that public engagement was needed before the fund could be rolled out nationally. “It is important to thoroughly engage communities as offenders on bail will have to go back to families and communities.”
Civil society group Just Detention International–South Africa (JDI-SA) said the problem of prisoners being unable to avoid bail was widespread. “Overcrowding is a huge problem in many correctional facilities. We have found, and it has been well documented by both JICS and Department of Correctional Services over the years, that many people in the typically overcrowded awaiting trial facilities are there because they can’t afford the bail granted, even when it’s a low amount,” said Doreen Gaura of JDI-SA.
She argued that the fund could have a significant impact, particularly for those detained for petty offences or juveniles. “Incarceration is already incredibly traumatising. Many people who suffer sexual abuse behind bars first experience abuse while in police holding or awaiting trial detention,” Gaura said.
“Custodial approaches must ideally be utilised as a last resort. A well-managed Bail Fund would alleviate the incredibly dehumanising and volatile conditions of awaiting trial detention and contribute to reducing the country’s high recidivism rates,” she added.
However, JDI-SA cautioned that the fund would require rigorous oversight. “A governing oversight structure comprised of vetted, diverse, and representative experts, as well as an accountability framework, would help ensure the fund is not misused,” Gaura said.
DA spokesperson on correctional services, Janho Engelbrecht, said the party supported the idea in principle, but insisted that “implementation must be guided by clear policy, stringent oversight, and transparency.”
“We agree that individuals accused of violent crimes or gender-based violence should be excluded from benefiting from such a fund. However, further safeguards should be considered including prior convictions, flight risk, and community impact,” Engelbrecht said.
He raised concerns about the fact that the fund will be run outside of government and proposed that the fund be independently administered, “with multi-sectoral representation, including civil society, the judiciary, correctional services, and Parliament. Regular audits, public reporting, and an accessible complaint mechanism are essential.”
Engelbrecht said reintegration efforts must include community education, victim support, and mediation as appropriate.”
Security and justice researcher David Bruce of the Institute for Security Studies said he trusted that JICS had thoroughly considered the proposal and its risks. “I would expect that they are highly attentive to the need to emphasise the overall safety of South Africans,” he said.
Bruce highlighted the broader social realities. “They [JICS] come across far too many cases where people are being incarcerated on petty offences. Many of these people could benefit from help of different kinds, but one thing is not to impose an unnecessary burden on people who already have difficult lives.”
He said criteria must be handled carefully, including attention to whether people had access to social support services. “One of the biggest challenges is the absence of support services for people suffering drug addiction,” Bruce noted.
Crime expert Chad Thomas added that the Bail Fund must be carefully targeted to prevent abuse. “First offenders for petty offences should be considered for funding from the Bail Fund, not criminals with prior convictions,” he said.
Thomas added that the fund could meaningfully ease pressure on the justice system.
On the risk of reoffending, Thomas warned: “There is always the risk of reoffending, especially in a country where so many live in abject poverty. But releasing petty criminals from the so-called ‘university of crime’ may prevent an opportunistic petty criminal from joining a gang and becoming a hardened career criminal.”
He said qualification criteria should extend beyond bail amounts: “Family circumstances, a fixed address, someone to vouch for them, and consideration for community and diversion programs,” he suggested.