PRETORIA – The Gauteng High Court in Pretoria has delivered two significant rulings in a high-stakes legal battle over the parole of life-sentence prisoners, sparing the Minister of Correctional Services from a contempt of court sentence while simultaneously blocking his attempt to appeal an order for the inmates’ immediate release.
The judgements, delivered in December 2025, mark the latest developments in a class action led by Mallele Phineas Mapote, a prisoner serving a life sentence for murder at a Johannesburg facility.
Mapote and a class of long-term inmates had successfully petitioned the court in 2023 for release on parole, arguing they were eligible after serving one-third of their sentences under the Correctional Services Act of 1959.
On 4 December 2025, Judge Johannes Strijdom dismissed an urgent application by Mapote to have the Minister of Correctional Services declared in contempt of court. The applicant had sought a 12-month suspended prison sentence for the Minister for failing to comply with a November 2023 order to arrange the prisoners’ release.
The court ruled that the contempt application was “premature,” as it was served four days before the legal deadline for the Minister to file for leave to appeal a previous ruling.
Judge Strijdom found that once the Minister filed his application for leave to appeal on 19 November 2025, the operation of the release order was legally suspended.
Furthermore, the judge cited a “fatal” procedural error: the Minister had not been personally served or joined in his personal capacity.
However, the Minister faced a setback on 10 December 2025, when Acting Judge Dikeledi Chabedi dismissed his application for leave to appeal the court’s refusal to rescind the original parole orders.
The Minister had argued that orders granted in his absence in July and November 2023, which certified the class action and ordered the releases, should be set aside because his legal team was never invited to the “Caselines” digital court system.
Chabedi rejected this explanation as “wholly inadequate,” noting that the Minister had knowledge of the case as early as March 2023 but failed to file an answering affidavit for nearly a year.
The court also highlighted that the Minister had already released some members of the class on parole between March and June 2023, which undermined his claim of having a bona fide defence against the original application.
“I find that there are no reasonable prospects of success and there are no compelling reasons warranting the granting of leave to appeal,” Chabedi ruled.
The dismissal of the leave to appeal means the original orders requiring the Department of Correctional Services to process the parole of the affected life-sentence prisoners remain in force.
While the Minister avoided a contempt finding, the department now faces the legal obligation to comply with the release order unless it successfully petitions a higher court.
The rulings conclude a year of intense litigation over the interpretation of older parole laws and the administrative duties of the Department of Correctional Services.
