So the deputy minister of police, Fikile Mbalula, is now being heralded as someone who has a complete disregard for our Constitution, one who wants to kill people of South Africa, an enemy of democracy.
For years I read articles and readers’ comments about the state of crime in South Africa and the inability of government in general, the police specifically, to deal with this scourge. Then along came a man who says things the way they are and plans accordingly to eliminate this problem. But because he is of a certain political party, we feel a moral and ethical obligation to ensure that his views are refuted as mad ravings of a power-hungry wannabe?
The problem is that Section 49 of the Criminal Procedure Act (CPA) is too vague and broad and puts the emphasis on “discretion”, but then it goes further and makes it almost impossible for a police officer to defend that discretion. Coupled to that is the fact that the South African Police Act (as amended) and the Independent Complaints Commission Act (as amended) makes it difficult further for police to use “effective force” to ensure that a crime is prevented or the perpetrator is brought to book.
Criminals are getting more and more sophisticated. Many crimes in South Africa, minor as well as major, could either be linked to or follow the same patterns as those used by syndicates. Criminals seem to have a very good understanding of South African law. They know that the police cannot shoot them provided they stick to certain criteria. For instance just make sure that as you run away you do not face the police officer on the scene. As long as your back is to them they have to fire a warning shot and wait for you to turn around and face them. How ridiculous is that?
Our minister of police introduced this issue last year already but now it seems as if the matter is being strongly pushed by his deputy. But I challenge anyone, anyone to tell me when Mbalula has ever said that it’s okay for the police to become trigger-happy. I have yet to see a statement from him stating that the police should just take out their weapons and start shooting at random. In fact the only recollection I have (and believe me, my recollection is very good and based on copies of all his statements on this issue) is of him demanding that the police should have the power to use effective force in implementing their constitutional mandate, including the use of deadly force.
From experience we know that every war has its casualties. I recently read a blog by an Israeli trying to explain why Israel is killing scores of innocent Palestinians in their quest to rid the region of Islamic fundamentalists! And we are at war against crime and criminals. But Mbalula has also stated that the law would not only be amended to give police power to shoot criminals, it would also be enhanced to ensure that police are accountable for every shooting. And where innocent people are shot, there would be a system to deal with that. In fact the national commissioner of police agreed to the criminal prosecution of a police constable who recently shot and killed a three-year-old boy rather than have an official investigation by the Independent Complaints Directorate, which would only take up time and resources.
So the amendment of Section 49 of the CPA is not about giving police the power to kill the whole country. It is a necessary tool to ensure that we deal effectively with crime and criminal activities. What we as a community can do is ensure that trigger-happy cowboys in the police are highlighted and that they are brought to book. Even when it seems that the system is protecting that type of element, we should make our voices heard — there are enough tools at our disposal to ensure that this rings true.
So, to Mbalula, you are indeed a brave man. I salute you and, despite the naysayers, am sure that the majority of people in South Africa are squarely behind your vision for a South Africa that offers security, comfort and peace.
This entry was posted
on Monday, November 16th, 2009 at 8:36 am and is filed under Perspective.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
37 Responses to “Mbalula, I salute you”
Well said Shareef. Without basic security and rule of law, we as a society, are stuck. If we look elsewhere in the world on how violent organized crime was overcome, we see ample evidence of how fighting fire with fire.
The whingers will complain like babies regardless of how this problem is solved. Fortunately, history has shown time and time again that it take courage to come to the decision of using lethal force against violent criminals since the stakes are raised for both criminals, the police and the public.
I liked what Mbalula had to say about crime. I loved it ! No excuses, no nuances, no pandering to crime, just straight talk !
I’m tired of crime organisations and small timers taking our police force for pussycats. I’m tired of an impotent leadership. I’m tired of idealistic notions of rehabilitation; I want punishment and retribution. I am sick of claims that crime is a poverty issue, when infact it is more of a pathology issue.
So, I like it when we confront crime as a scourge and as a despicable threat to our national security. I want our people to sleep safe at night knowing someone is protecting them. I want the criminals to know this. Infact I want criminals to get the message that someone is out to get them, that there is and there should be an all-out war against them. I like such noise, even if it is mostly talk, but I like the message and the attempt to win the confidence of the people. I actually support the death penalty (but I am in the minority, so I grudgingly concede to the majority).
So, I like it that some people in this government are fed up and want to confront criminals with the language criminals understand very well. I AM A HARDLINER ON CRIME. I completely support the new measures and I wish all citizens get well behind these new measures. There is a crisis here, so let’s get with the program.
“As long as your back is to them they have to fire a warning shot and wait for you to turn around and face them. How ridiculous is that?”
ask the young man who was shot dead, shot in the back whilst running from the police.
His crime? Smoking a joint.
Then come back and tell me why you salute a man who is encouraging an ill trained, unmotivated and thuggish police force to shoot more freely.
Do not attempt to speak to matters that you are barely farmiliar with and trapping yourself trying to interprete things you do not understand. These issues are not about what you heard (who cares about what you heard) but the potential conseqences if they are carried out.
Is changing legislation really going to have a significant impact on the crime problem? Sounds like a distraction from the real issue of police incompetency. The SAPS are underpaid and underskilled. Investing in improving their capacity for quality police work is surely more important than nitpicking about the particular phrasing of the crim proc act?But placing radical former youth leaders with a knack for populist rhetoric in crucial departments is a clever move,now they can appear to be taking a “tough” stance of crime without actually doing anything differently.
You are missing the point. Section 49 as it is currently worded allows the police to use maximum force if its is reasonably believed that their or anyone elses life is in danger. Its not vague or ambiguous but it is in line with our constitution.The problem is with how our officers are trained. For example, I recently attended a firearms competency course for SAPS members as an observer. By the emd of that course 70 percent of SAPS members failed. This was not a special weapons or tactics course, it was a basic firearms competency assesment- the same as you and I would have to take if we wanted to own a gun.
Who decides which criminals deserve to be shot anyway? Please tell us what the criteria are? Will amendments to the act clarify this? By the way, there are systems in place to hold police accountable for excessive force…they dont work. What makes you think that new systems will?
Ask any analyst who has actually looked at the stats, someone who has a grasp of how policing works (or dosent) and you will draw very diffirent conclusions. The police dont need more power, they need to be provided with the right training and support to use those they already have.
What the “thinnking” public want is better trained police who know how to use force in a reasonable way. Not just shoot at random at whom they ‘think’ is endangering ‘their’ or bystanders lives.
Sadly, random shooting will have collateral damage.
Criminals are rife in our SAPS and can shoot the real victim to prevent identification.
Effective training not trigger happy, Cops dubious morals, who are part of the problem.
Most of our fellow citizens are such hypocrits, We have all been calling for Government to at least show some political will, that it’s serious about solving crime and stop criminals in their rampant acts, Now, for instance, we have some radio personalities, especially Radio 702 weekdays morning talkshow host, shifting the goal posts, talking about how everybody is incompetent within the police service and on the other hand complaining about the overpopulated prisons. We need to give our goverment the suppport it badly needs in this regard to solve the crime problem. I’m no ANC fan really but please people let’s stop complaining and make the country work.
I have no problem with rules of enagagement being clarified, if these are too vague and make the police ineffective. What I do take exception to is this bland acceptance that innocents will die. 3 year old gunned down? Ag shame, it’s for the greater good, we’ll prosecute the policeman, pay you some blood money, thank you for you sacrifice, now go away and stop whining, this is war.
Shareef, what will you say when the next person gunned down is your mother? Your wife? Your brother? After all, it’s the innocent who’ll be most likely to be facing the policeman, yelling, hysterical, rather than running away. It’s the innocent who assume it’s safe to run towards the police, perhaps holding some pathetic item of self-defence. Who do you think the cop wil shoot at?
And then to have the gall to say, as Dave Harris does, that to complain about mere collateral damage is whinging, and that it takes courage to use lethal force. Do you have the courage to go to that 3 year old’s mother, look her in the eye and tell her “collateral damage” is inevitable? That innocents must die? Yes Dave, let’s see you do that.
What few seem to recall, is that only a few short years ago, there was an ‘investigative reporter’ programme on TV covering the overall psychological state of the police force. A Senior Police Psycho-analyst revealed that -at that time- up to 40% of members are under such severe mental strain that they probably wouldn’t even be certified as fit to possess a firearm at all, let alone be issued one for duty purposes. These (borderline psychotics) are the people we are being asked to trust handling dangerous weapons in our midst, people not only mentally unfit but also ill-prepared (and trained) for the daily requirements of a very high pressure environment.
I dont like responding to comments on my blogs. But just to clarify something for sizwe mqobo. I am a political secretary for the ANC in Parliament, currently serving on the ANC Study group on Public Works. Until recently, I was serving on the ANC Study group on Police. Although I had been redeployed, I found a love for the security sector, especially the police. That is why I retained my alerts for articles on police. I also keep up with what is going on in the sector. So your allegation that I write about things I know nothing about, is totally unfounded. Why would I hang on to copies of statements made by police authorities and still dont know what I speak of? I do not consider myself an expert, but I do make sure of my facts
Mark i will put up my hand and say the criminal who is carrying a gun to rob, hijack, rape or whatever deserves to be shot because he came prepared to shoot someone else. I agree with you they dont need more power, just hope the justice system needs changing there are plenty criminals commiting crimes and they are on bail.
It is about time that government declares crime as a national emergency. Criminals are ruthless and merciless. The number of incidences of violent crime splashed on the pages of our newspapers speaks for itself. have you ever come across a criminal who shows compassion and mercy for his victim? No sirree, they would rather kill their victim. How many victims of crime were shot and killed in their own homes (some in front of their children or partners) or whilst surrendering his/her car to hijackers?
Organisations such as the Human Rights Commission remain silent at the wanton slaughter of innocent victims at the hands of ruthless criminals.
Well done to the ANC-led government for taking the fight to the criminals. As South Africans we are tired of being held captive in our homes. Viva Mbalula, Viva!
Intellectually Challenged on November 17th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
Solving crime requires responsibility - Fathers nurture your children, teach them values(honesty, truth) and humanity(empathy, seeing yourself through the ‘other’s eyes) - Mothers nurture your children, teach them self love, responsibility, cleanliness and all the values of family.
The present situation is really a result of a battered society and it is said that when we look at wasy of fixing the ripples of the past those on whose behalf they were created accuse us for them.
Our society is messed up- although some believe only ‘black society’ is messed up. People are not criminals because they are poor or becasue they are ‘black’ they are criminals because they are greedy(Agliotti) and have no values for self and other peoples property.
But of course you salute Field-Lieutenant-General-Colonel-Supreme Commander Mbalula. Aren’t you paid to?
All the proposed amendments want to do is remove ‘reasonable’ and add some legalese that basically says ‘whenever’. It’s perfectly reasonable for people to be shot in the back when they’re running for a crowded place with a gun in their hand. Don’t fall for that old propaganda hogwash about shooting in the back, blah blah blah blah old uneducated tripe. When you’re a lawyer or you’ve at least read and understood the law as it currently stands it might have more impact.
As it is you’re just parroting the he-said-she-said stuff.
I doubt if the author read Section 49 of the Criminal Procedure Act. There is nothing wrong with the Act as it is. Fact: Brazil use the shoot kill principle but still suffuring from violent crime. Street battles between armed gangs and police are prevalent and the winner is always the gangs and the losers are innocent citizens and the police. Fact: Prosecution based crime intelligent gathering and investigations, well trined police men, infiltration of the armed gangs has been proven world wide as the solution to crime problem. Giving a badly trained illitrate policemen licence to kill is not good at all.
Shareef you are as misguided in your interpretation of section 49 just like the ministers and police commmissioner. The section has never prohibited any policeman from protecting himself. It has instead called for sensible use of the firearm in order to protect the innocent. Your disdain for the idea that a warning shot is fired first at a person who is running away is disconcerting to say the least. Can you be in grave danger of a person who runs away from you? Further your recollection of whatever drivel Mbalula has spewed out seems to be very selective or your interpretation skills are warped. What minister tells the public that we are here to protect you but remember some of you will still get shot by the police. He is strengthening the police in their believe that it is okay to shoot first and asks questions later. If it was’nt for this idiotic policy, that three year old toddler would still be alive today. I agree with the readers that the current force needs to be better skilled and equipped not given more fire power. But then again you sit with a commissioner and ministers who does’nt know the first thing about policing. Have they ever been in the field and experience how things work except attending passing out parades and running up huge hotel bills for the taxpayer’s account?
It’s easy to talk tough when you’re surrounded by a small army of bodyguards. If Fikile Mbulala was as vulnerable to the outcomes of his reckless statements as the rest of us, he might not be as “brave”. The fact is a soft police service is not the issue here, our police already tend to deal with situations over eagerly, I’ve seen and heard of these guys going over the top for minor offences, and I also know of them often mistaking innocent civilians as perpetrators.
What needs to be addressed is the high number of vacancies in crucial departments such as forensics and crime intelligence, the low morale amongst officers; which are underpaid and highly stressed, and community involvement or lack thereof; due to a fear of not being protected and supported for reporting and confronting criminals.
People have to see the benefit in stopping crime, and criminals need to know that they will be caught and convicted. According to research, the average criminal is only arrested after doing crime for 7 years. On top of that conviction rates are low due to bungling of evidence and a heavily burdened judicial system.
Yes, the crime in this country needs urgent fixing, but banging on the engine of a broken car might make you feel better for a little while, but it won’t get the motor running, for that you need experience and understanding of the components of the car.
Mu Afrika I totally agree with you, it’s a cultural thing and when we condone “lesser crimes” such as the buying of driver’s licenses or even littering, we allow a lawless mentality to manifest itself. You have to deal with crime in it’s infancy and even more importantly you have to encourage people to develop good habits before they’re exposed to bad. It all starts at home.
Like America, SA is awash with guns. People with guns kill one another, regularly, frequently, all the time.
Hand guns are outlawed in Botswana and the police are not armed either. Accordingly, very few people die of gunshot wounds in Botswana. It’s not rocket science. Get rid of the guns!
What a load of BS.
The chap who shot the 3-year-old knew how to use his gun very effectively. His aim was sure. He could probably have done with an eye test through, since he couldn’t tell the difference between an adult and a child and there was nothing pipe-like in the car.
Why does it seem that we’ve got it all back to front? If the crim is caught, he will likely escape his jail sentence because his police file will get lost or he’ll bribe a warder. He’ll be back out there for seconds. Logically, the death sentence seems the way to go: at least save the children and those we all know are completely innocent. And make it quick; I’d love to know how much more we spend on the penal system than on AIDS (could be called the penis system).
And if justice misjudges a few not-so-guilty along the way, at least it would have deliberated over their fate, which is more than happens when innocents are caught in the crossfire.
The utter lack of logic still amazes me…
@ Kholekile..
well done sir I have the same feeling as you ,
There are bad apples everywhere ..but also a lot of good ones as well .We must support our police. South Africa is ours, folks lets help clean it up ,there is no other way
So the Government says it will kill you if it thinks or suspects that you are a criminal (only a court can pass a “guilty” verdict), and you accept this because know you are not a criminal right? But then you happen to be mistaken for one and bang! You are a statistic. Of the innocent people killed so far none posed any danger to the police and yet unrestrained fire-power was directed at them (the innocent). Some policemen are now said to be using the “shoot to kill” to settle outstanding grudges or carrying out paid assassinations. In this way the police force is feared, even by the innocent law-abiding citizens. Mbalula’s statement was as naïve as it is dangerous. Public statements made by the Minister, his deputy and even the President incorrectly creates the impression that the police cannot use force or kill, if circumstances allow, to effect arrest or defend themselves and others. It would seem though that the proposed amendment to section 49 isn’t so much that the police must shoot to kill, but that they must be absolved from any responsibility.
I wish we could trust the police to do their jobs. I have witnessed people being beaten by the police for reporting prostitution in the neighbourhood as well as armed thugs demanding bribes at the border.
If the crime is not tackled it will scupper the future of South Africa and damn many people to a brutal death at the hands of the criminals and probably at the hands of a few cops as well.
There is a deep seated mistrust and even hatred of the police in SA that also needs to be dealt with. Allowing them to shoot more freely is not a good idea.
If you have worked closely with the SAPS you will no doubt be very aware that the majority of them are ill-educated and not competant enough to stand guard at a school, let alone make a descision on who to shoot or not. I have had extensive experience and am absolutely sh1ting myself that I will be stopped at a roadblock and while reaching for my drivers liscence be shot (reaching for a gun).
The SAPS has been a great employment place for anyone - their credentials hardly ever checked
The cause of crime is not a gun or a need for shooting but poverty, bad education and a lack of jobs. Create the means to a job through better education and most of your problems will be solved.
It will not be long before the list of cases against the SAPS for wrongful shootings will outweigh those of criminal acts - not that a police shooting of an innocent bystander is not criminal in itself.
Giving badly trained, ill educated and badly motivated policemen an order to shoot, will only end in a very bad pace and i hope i do not become one such statistic .
Do you think potential visitors for 2010 will be impressed by this instruction to shoot first and ask questions later? Maybe visitors from Somalia and Nigeria will feel a little safer, but I doubt your average first worlder will.
Still, this is supposed to impress South Africans not visiting foreigners.
Alan in Botswana on November 18th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
It is refreshing to take note your objectivity regarding your analysis of current affairs - sometimes I just get sick visiting this blog space because many commentators here are simply predictable i.e. always winging how this transitional democracy is so bad in not doing this or that - its so boring at times - thanks to you Shareef
All comments must be approved by our editors, click here to read the editorial guidelines for comments. Please allow some time for our editors to approve your comment after posting.
profile
Moegamat Shareef Blankenberg is a happy chappie who like to open a can of worms and create controversy. He is at his best if he can sit in a dark room and dream up some conspiracy (most noticeably, where do you think the McCarthy tapes came from?)
If you hear that the Union Buildings are to be renamed, dont be surprised to hear that was me making serious "suggestions" to the President.
Moegamat Shareef Blankenberg has the private mobile number of Big Brother Muammar Ghadaffi on his speed dial. He spoke on different occassions at the closed sessions of the polit bureau of the junta of Myanmar. He often plays camel polo with President Ahmadinejad. He also regularly flies from Cape Town to have dinner with his good friends Uncle Bob and Aunt Grace Mugabe.
Recently, international soccer governing body Fifa decided to take a Cape Town company to court over their selling of key rings. The key rings are in ...
It's been dubbed "anthemgate". November 13 2009 the South African rugby team, affectionately known as the Springboks, is playing France at the Municip...
Brandon Huntley claims he has "opened people's eyes" to the problem of crime in South Africa. For those not in the know, Huntley was recently granted ...
Muslim children attending madrassa are taught from a very early age about the role of a mother and the respect we need to accord them. The Prophet (pe...
I must admit that I was never a fan of ANC Youth League President Julius Malema. I used to criticise many of his statements, both in private and in AN...
Loading ...
Well said Shareef. Without basic security and rule of law, we as a society, are stuck. If we look elsewhere in the world on how violent organized crime was overcome, we see ample evidence of how fighting fire with fire.
The whingers will complain like babies regardless of how this problem is solved. Fortunately, history has shown time and time again that it take courage to come to the decision of using lethal force against violent criminals since the stakes are raised for both criminals, the police and the public.
(Report abuse)