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

UFS in joint venture with Empowerdex
2006-11-17

The University of the Free State (UFS) today became the first tertiary institution in the country to sign a joint venture agreement with Empowerdex, South Africa’s foremost black economic empowerment (BEE) ratings agency, to train BEE practitioners that will implement BEE across all sectors of the economy.
 
The agreement was signed by Mr Vuyo Jack, Executive Chairman of Empowerdex and Prof Frederick Fourie, Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the UFS.
 
Mr Jack and Mr Chia-Chao Wu, Managing Director of Empowerdex, will be appointed as visiting professors in the UFS School of Management as part of the joint venture.
 
“The joint venture entails the establishment of a transformation office within the Centre for Business Dynamics at the UFS which will administer training programmes and conduct contract research on BEE as well as the establishment of a verification agency within the UFS School of Management,” said Mr Danie Jacobs, Head of the Centre for Business Dynamics at the UFS.
 
“The verification agency within the UFS School of Management will be able to verify the BEE compliance of businesses in the Free State and Northern Cape,” said Mr Jacobs.
 
According to Mr Jacobs, the venture originates from the Department of Trade and Industry’s (DTI) directive to draft codes of good practice for businesses as stated in the Broad Based Black Empowerment Act 53 of 2003. The final codes will be announced shortly and will act as a standard framework for the measurement of broad based BEE across all sectors of the economy.
 
The codes comprise seven elements on which basis points are allocated to a business to determine its level of compliance to BEE. 
 
“The UFS is the only tertiary institution in the country which offers a formal certificate whereby BEE practitioners can be trained in order to ensure that they are competent to measure BEE,” said Mr Jacobs.
 
“Being able to utilise the UFS’ experience and expertise in the field of transformation is of great benefit to us and it will assist us in driving BEE in the country,” said Mr Jack. 
 
According to Mr Jack, the UFS is centrally situated, which will make it easy for BEE practitioners to access the appropriate training course to suit their needs. “The venture will have an impact not only on this region, but on the whole country as the extensive networks of both Empowerdex and the UFS will contribute to us reaching and training BEE practitioners,” said Mr Jack. 
 
The training programmes that will be offered by the transformation office within the UFS Centre for Business Dynamics are the Management Development Programme for BEE and Transformation, the Executive Credit Bearing Short Learning Programme and an online Non-Credit Bearing Short Learning Programme for BEE Specialists. 
 
“The expertise and knowledge that Empowerdex brings to the joint venture is invaluable. Empowerdex pioneered the empowerment methodology and has been actively involved in the drafting of broad based BEE legislation, regulations and transformation charters,” said Mr Jacobs.
 
Media release
Issued by: Lacea Loader
Media Representative
Tel:   (051) 401-2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
17 November 2006
 

Being empowered: Mr Vuyo Jack, Executive Chairman of BEE ratings agency Empowerdex, and Prof Frederick Fourie, Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the University of the Free State (UFS). Empowerdex and the UFS signed an agreement to train practitioners that will implement BEE across all sectors of the economy.

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