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

Student leaders reflect on post-Holocaust Germany and make connections to post-apartheid SA in study tour
2015-12-08

Njabulo Mabaso
Photo: Sam Styrax

“Our beloved South Africa (SA) has done quite a lot insofar as policy formulation to address the past imbalances is concerned. However, implementation has proven to be the biggest challenge.”

This is the view held by Nkosinathi Tshabalala, former Student Representative Council (SRC): Religious Affairs at Qwaqwa Campus of the University of the Free State (UFS), who was part of the Global Leadership Study Tour.

From 14 - 22 November 2015, a cohort of 37 outgoing SRC members studied through tours and seminars in Germany and Poland. The historical education trip was organised jointly by UFS Rector and Vice-Chancellor, Prof Jonathan Jansen, and the Student Affairs office. The study tour was supported and facilitated by the Johannesburg Holocaust and Genocide Centre.

Tshabalala added: “We know the thinking behind the likes of Reconstruction and Development Programme and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, to mention only two. But what have these done to close the gap between the rich and the poor? What have they done to encourage proper and complete reconciliation? Germany paid for the damages which came as a result of the Holocaust, and it is time that we do the same.”

Mosa Leteane, former SRC President of the Bloemfontein Campus, echoed Tshabalala’s sentiments as they relate to the SA experience. “In light of the Rhodes Must Fall movement, one of the things that the youth was looking at were the symbols, what symbols mean, how symbols works as part of reparation and redress in a country that has come from a tragic past,” she said.

Leteane identified similarities between how our country and the two European nations have confronted the issue of trans-generational trauma and the reconciliation process, albeit in significantly differing circumstances.

“Within the first 20 years or so, it was almost like SA. Nobody wanted to talk about it, people just wanted to build the country.” Nonetheless, “the memorialisation and commemoration happened only for the last 20 years or so,” added Leteane.

Transformation of the European political, environmental, and social landscape took place only when students and the second generation began to challenge the status quo, and to lobby for transformation through the erection of memorials and monuments. Owing to the courage of the young generation, those countries were able to take meaningful steps towards transformation through an accurate narration and commemoration of history, which is a key factor in reconciliation.

Our students had the opportunity to conduct a comparative study of post-Holocaust Germany and post-apartheid South Africa in terms of how government and universities dealt with trans-generational trauma.

By being exposed to remnants of what used to be sites such as the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp memorial in Poland, the young leaders were encouraged to continue their attempt at nation building and advance transformation and reconciliation.


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