31 October 2012

The African Policing Civilian Oversight Forum (APCOF) is a network of state and civil society African practitioners active in policing reform and civilian oversight over policing in Africa. APCOF objectives are to:  Create and sustain public confidence in the police  Develop a culture of human rights, integrity, transparency and accountability within the police  Promote a good working relationships between the police and the community

 This submission draws directly from the APCOF Policy Paper, Regulating Private Security in South Africa: Context, challenges and recommendations, published in 2011.

 In this submission we motivate for an overhaul of the systems by which Individual Security Guards are held to account for criminal misconduct. ◦ Increased blurring of private and public policing practices and of the policing of private and public spaces. ◦ That the new reality of private security in South Africa is one that constitutes a significant challenge to current regulatory systems that must be addressed. ◦ While the South African public are the subject of substantial legal protection from abuse by the SAPS and MPS, yet there is little comparable protection in relation to the private security industry.

 Few centralised channels by which members of the public can complain;  No consistent and thorough information on the nature of private security company abuses – except through a review of incidences that make it to the courts.

 Focus almost exclusively on the regulation of employers; the registration of employees; enforcement of minimum working conditions; and ensuring training standards are met  Little oversight over the conduct of individual security officers and officials.  Under the current dispensation, instances of individual misconduct are dependent on individual charges being laid, investigated by the police and brought to court.

 A set of binding rules for all private security employers and employees  PSIRA is tasked with enforcing the Code of Conduct  Sanctions ◦ Warning ◦ Reprimand ◦ Suspending registration for a period not exceeding six months; ◦ Withdrawing registration; ◦ Imposing fines; ◦ Publishing “details of the conviction of improper conduct and of any penalty that was imposed for the specific breach

 Limited capacity, focused on checking registrations of employees and that companies were fulfilling labour obligations,  Poor collection of evidence resulting in little or no information for SAPS to build its cases for prosecution,  Investigations were mostly complaints- driven, came predominantly from the public and consisted mostly of complaints about labour issues, working conditions or low wages.

 A positive duty be placed on the private security industry, via PSIRA, to submit itself to scrutiny and reporting in relation to its record of action in relation to safeguarding the human rights of South African citizens  The private security industry becomes legally obliged to submit all cases of death as a result of security guard action, rape or torture to an independent, external facility. We recommend that this facility be one of the current institutions that already carry an oversight mandate.  Investigations, whether undertaken by SAPS or internally, should be subject to audit and or further investigation by an external oversight agency such as the Independent Police Investigation Directorate.  The private security industry be required to provide detailed public reports on its investigations and other oversight activities.  Reporting and analysis mechanisms that allow the Civilian Secretariat of Police to assess and report, and make relevant policy recommendations, on any systemic issues within the industry, or parts of the industry, which give rise to abuse and hamper effective accountability.