Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
02 October 2020 | Story Prof Theodore Petrus | Photo Supplied
Prof Theodore Petrus is an associate Professor in Anthropology at the UFS

The death of Andries Tatane in 2011, the Marikana massacre in 2012, and the recent fatal shooting of Natheniël Julies have one thing in common   they involved acts of what can be called police brutality. The issue of police brutality has emerged as a serious issue of national concern. Given the widespread concerns about crime and criminality in South Africa, the historical and contemporary context of policing and law enforcement has a significant impact on not only the South African Police’s (SAPS) ability to police crime, but also the public’s perceptions of how they police.

In June 2020, the National Minister of Police, Bheki Cele, reported in Parliament that 49 cases of police brutality had been reported since the start of the COVID-19 lockdown regulations. Cele said that while the police were allowed by law to act with deadly force, they were also bound to act within the law and the Constitution. And this is where we find the dilemma of formal policing in South Africa, especially in relation to another issue of national concern, namely gangsterism and gang violence.

A transformed police
 
Starting with the wider historical and contemporary context of policing, after 1994, the transformation of the SAPS to bring it in line with the new democratic principles of the new dispensation was a matter of priority. For the majority of South Africans, the police were viewed as the brutal enforcers of the apartheid state, concerned more with carrying out and enforcing the oppressive objectives of the apartheid government rather than serving and protecting the public. It was thus imperative, in order to restore the public’s trust in the police, that the police service be transformed. However, despite the structural and legislative transformations of the police, subsequent acts and incidents involving the police have served to equate the post-1994 “transformed” police service with that of the apartheid state. In addition to the much-publicised incidents alluded to earlier (as well as many others), reports of police mismanagement, corruption and criminality within the highest levels of the police service itself, have reinforced negative perceptions of the police. It remains to be seen what impact the SAPS Amendment Bill of 2020 will have on the SAPS going forward. Will this legislative amendment only address the issues superficially, or will it get to the root causes of the current challenges facing the SAPS?

On the other end of the spectrum, gangsterism and gang violence in South Africa also have a historical and contemporary context, too complex to go into any great detail here. Suffice to say that the gang challenge in many contemporary South African communities is not a recent phenomenon, but is a deeply entrenched issue, so rooted in these communities that it cannot simply be rooted out using a heavy-handed law enforcement approach. Gangsterism forms a significant part of the social and cultural contexts of the communities in which it exists, and is a manifestation of the same historical and contemporary structural violence and marginalisation of these communities. 

Consequences of conflict between police and gang-affected communities

When the police and gang-affected communities come into conflict, the dynamics that are exposed can have a range of consequences. In the Western Cape, for example, we have seen the emergence of community-based anti-gang and anti-crime vigilante organisations such as People Against Gangsterism and Drugs (Pagad). In Eldorado Park, we witnessed the fatal shooting of Natheniël Julies, leading to community outrage and anger against the police. In the northern areas of Port Elizabeth, we see communities demonstrating a lack of co-operation with police investigating gang-related cases, even going as far as helping known gang members to evade police detection, or hiding illegal weapons and firearms. And in the Free State, in September, provincial police spokesperson, Brigadier Motantsi Makhele indicated that at least 12 people were arrested in connection with gang wars. Yet gang violence continues, despite police intervention.

So the question is: what can be done about the problems of police brutality and gangsterism?

There is no simple answer. Also a “one-size-fits-all” approach will not be effective. However, recognising and addressing the following factors may be a step in the right direction:

1. Studies of police culture that address the root causes of police brutality should be prioritised, and the results of such studies taken seriously.
2. The police must become aware of the historical and contemporary issues affecting their current public perception.
3. Serious attention needs to be given to police leadership and management, starting from the Ministry of Police down to branch level.
4. A holistic approach to addressing gangsterism should be encouraged, rather than making it solely a law enforcement issue.
5. The politicisation of gangsterism and policing should make way for policies and recommendations based on thorough social scientific research.

Police brutality and gang-related crime are not unique to South Africa, nor are they only challenges in “developing” countries. The US, Australia and in the UK and France, cases of police brutality and gang-related violence have been well documented. In fact, these countries have also not yet found viable and sustainable ways of addressing these challenges. What makes South Africa unique is our specific context that underpins these challenges. So any sustainable solution(s) will have to be based on a fundamental understanding of this context. For as long as this is ignored, any efforts to curb police brutality in the carrying out of their duties, or effective policing of gangs that does not violate human rights, will remain unrealised and will maintain the current levels of distrust between the public and the police.  

Opinion article by Prof Theodore Petrus, Department of Anthropology, University of the Free State.

News Archive

Johann Naudé talks at first Beyers Naudé lecture for 2012
2012-08-02

At the event were, from the left: Ms Bontle Senne, Managing Director for the PUKU Children’s Literature Foundation, Mr Sipho Hlongwane, writer and columnist for the Daily Maverick, Prof. Nicky Morgan, Vice-Rector: Operations at the UFS, Mr Themba Mola, Chief Operations Officer at Kagiso Trust, Mr Johann Naudé, son of Dr Beyers Naudé, and Dr Choice Makhetha, Vice-Rector: External Relations.
Photo: Stephen Collett
2 August 2012

The University of the Free State (UFS) together withKagiso Trust, presented the first Beyers Naudé lecture for 2012 on its South Campus in Bloemfontein last week. Speakers like Dr Wilmot James, Member of Parliament, Mr Johann Naudé, son of Dr Beyers Naudé, Mr Sipho Hlongwane, writer and columnist for the Daily Maverick and Ms Bontle Senne, Managing Director for the PUKU Children’s Literature Foundation, all gave a lecture around this year’s theme: Collaborative partnerships for social cohesion: Building a nation with ethics.

Dr Beyers Naudé played a major role in the formation of Kagiso Trust. His contribution to the trust and the fight against oppression in South Africa, as well as his challenging of the establishment from which he came, makes him one of South Africa’s courageous heroes. Kagiso Trust thus saw it fit to celebrate the life of this clerical activist through a Memorial Lecture The Beyers Naudé Memorial Lecture is an effort by the Trust to engage South Africans into a dialogue about issues affecting our nation.

Mr Johann Naudé talked about the lessons they as children learnt from their parents as well as his father’s decision to respond to the needs of the people in South Africa. Even before the Sharpeville Massacre, Dr Naudé began a self-transformation that led to his rejection of apartheid. “Apartheid had no theological or scriptural grounds and my father decided to resign from the church. After that, he started to talk openly against apartheid and he also paid the price for that. For seven years he was under house arrest and we as his children also felt the effect of his decision. At the University of Pretoria in a residence where I stayed as a student I was called in and told that I would be treated as an outcast. Loans and jobs were also closed for us as children and as a result, we all started our own businesses,” Mr Naudé said.

“Furthermore, our parents taught us to believe in ourselves. He also said we have rights and we can only demand those rights if we take the responsibility that goes with it. My father also taught us to honour and to respect our fellow men, elderly people and the culture of people different from us. We were also taught to apologise for the wrongs to our fellow men and to acknowledge earnestly that we were wrong.”

Dr Wilmot James said that there were two things consistent in the life of Dr Beyers Naudé, namely justice and fairness. “There are many Nelson Mandelas and Beyers Naudés out there. It is the responsibility of political parties and institutions to motivate such leadership. We must ask ourselves: Are my actions and decisions ethical and will they have fair consequences?” Dr James said.

Mr Hlongwane focused his presentation on the ethics part of the theme. He said: “We in South Africa fall very short of ethics. We can start by respecting each other and taking care of one another. The Constitution will not mean a thing if we fail to respect and trust one another. We will have no cohesive society if we continue to treat those different from us like dirt. It is also our ethical duty to build up the disadvantaged.

In her discussion, Ms Senne emphasised the role of the youth in South Africa. “Our youth is failing our state because our state is failing our youth. Their role is to bring cohesion and acts of courageousness to the table. For them to contribute in a practical and sustainable manner, they need to start making the changes they want to see in society. They are young people and they can make it work because they do have access to the necessary means (social networks) to get things done. They must get involved,” she said.

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept