The content on this page is not written by Polity.org.za, but is supplied by third parties. This content does not constitute news reporting by Polity.org.za.

Probation officers should conduct a full inquiry into convicted fraudster Schabir Shaik’s alleged assault of Sunday Tribune journalist, Amanda Khoza, and her photographer, at a golf course in Durban.

Mr. Shaik allegedly grabbed Ms. Khoza by the throat, slapped both her cheeks, and shouted:“Who sent you? How do I know you are not a terrorist?” The Tribune reports that Mr. Shaik’s accomplices then assaulted Ms. Khoza’s photographer, and confiscated his camera. Both were later reportedly told by Mr. Shaik that while they had been in their mothers’ wombs, he had been “fighting for people like you to have rights.”

The Tribune says that Mr. Shaik “pointed out his credentials as an ANC cadre, and the fact that he had flown with presidents.”

While Schabir Shaik may not have been in breach of his generous parole conditions by playing a round of golf, a parole is a conditional release, premised on the condition that you lead an exemplary life and do not commit further crimes. If you do, you can and should be returned to jail, because clearly the concession granted to you, to serve correctional supervision outside prison, has not had an effect.

Moreover, Mr. Shaik was released in terms of section 79 of the Correctional Services Act, because, according to the Correctional Services minister, he was “terminally ill”. In terms of the Act, the only reason an offender can be released on medical parole is because such offender is in the “final phase” of a “terminal disease or condition”. Such a release is done, according to the Act, to allow the prisoner “to die a dignified and consolatory death”.

Yet two years after his release on medical parole, Mr. Shaik is playing golf on weekends. Far from suffering from a terminal disease Mr Shaik now appears to have undergone a miraculous recovery -- sufficient to allow him to play golf, and shout at people and assault them.

There should be a full inquiry by the correctional supervision officers into this incident. If that investigation confirms the contents of this morning’s Tribune report then Mr. Shaik’s parole can and should be revoked in terms of section 75 of the Correctional Services Act. Mr. Shaik has violated his parole conditions in the past, and assault would clearly constitute a further breach of these conditions; it should be made clear to him and every other parolee that no-one is above the law.