Draft White Paper on Safety and Security: briefing by SAPS

This premium content has been made freely available


22 July 1998
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

A summary of this committee meeting is not yet available.

Meeting report


22 July 1998

Documents handed out:
Draft White Paper on Safety and Security: In Service of Safety : 1998 – 2003 [available at http://www.polity.org.za/govdocs/white_papers/]
Summary of Draft White Paper: prepared by Parliamentary Research Unit (see Appendix)
Classification of South African Police Service Amendment Bill: Legal Opinion

This was a briefing meeting and people were asked to raise concerns around the draft White Paper. Concerns were raised on both the content and the process of the discussion document. There will be hearings on the 3, 4 and 5 August 1998.

There will be a briefing on the South African Police Service Amendment Bill
on 19 August 1998. This Bill deals with the establishment, functions and control of a municipal police service. Legal opinion had been received on this Bill regarding its classification and the recommendation that it be reclassified as a S75 Bill had been agreed to by the Chairperson and Speaker of both Houses.


The document on the classification of South African Police Service Amendment Bill was discussed firstly. The NCOP was deeply involved in this bill , as a matter of fact it was said from the legal opinion that they should be excluded in this matter as they do not have concurrent legislative powers since the bill falls outside the scope of Schedule 4. Therefore it was argued from the legal opinion that the Bill does not fall under section 76 of the Constitution but falls under section 75. The members of the committee did not comment on the Bill.

Officials from the Department of Safety and Security briefed the committee on the drafting process (which is outlined in the document itself) and the contents of this discussion document.

Questions by committee members:

Whether the position of the present Chief Executive Officer, Meyer Khan, is going to be phased out?

How are resources going to be allocated to implement this policy?

Response: Aware of budget cuts – different ways of doing the same things would definitely save the case. The burden would be more on National government as opposed to local.

How many Accounting Officers are going to account on public accounts?

Two Accounting Officers but Accounting head and Officer as there are or will be managerial conflicts or interests

Regarding the categorisation of crime, wat is social crime prevention?

Refer NCPS causes of crime – Relation of alcohol and Murder

Social actions that contribute to anyone social crime

What is the role and capacity of private and in-house security?

The role of private security is important but should be dealt with in a separate police paper.

Why are the tasks of the provincial secretariat not spelt out?

Role of Provincial Secretariat: receive budget from Provinces and are not accountable Nationally . Provincial secretariat relates to local structures

Can we get emphasize on social crime prevention?

How can results be measurable?

Looking at the UK experience, it is how people feel in relation to crime: this is how you can measure results.

-Institution of Safety and Security be mobilized

-Continue justice programe (intergrated) as outlined in the NCPS

-Draft of role of secretariat after ------------ hearings this would be

Has there be any relations between SAPS and Justice department

Why is the secretariat separated separated from the Ministry?( DEPARTMENTAL STRUCTURE)

Can we have clarity on official government?


Ministry is separate entity

Crime prevention need to start at local level – Chicago experience


The document does not address needs of rural areas – has the issue of tribal police been considered?

Tribal policing – urban biased

What’s new about the white paper?

Crime combating and law enforcement

Victim empowerment is new to police service hence white paper


  1. Data kept on SAPS
  2. NCPS interdepartmental approach
  • any provision made involvement of community police forum in respect of parole – release of prisoners
  • Western Cape Community safety justice forums with social service
  • Release of offenders/bail issues – role could be played by community?

3. Justice criminal forums- what?

  • Secretary for safety and security
  1. Measurable objectives?
  2. Institutional Reform , very narrow definition


Yes, there is crime statistics available information system

haven’t settled with CPF’s – they have discussed with them. By the 15th after the hearing they’ll get a feedback on what to ----------

Culture of the SAPS is opposing the Law enforcement – insensitive way of dealing with victims of rape?

Data that enables them to compare measure arrest – convictions (billaterals)?

Ans. Acknowledge that law enforcement accountability

Discussion process

Discuss the document

Points of discussion

Broad policy issues – Not really addressed in the policy document

Social crime – what about white collar crime - not addressed


Section 1

Towards law enforcement – Criminal justice system not addressed properly

-consolidation of policy framework – not addressed

-consolidation between police service and courts?

-paragraph 4 page 8 – police investigators plan

Addition – social and economic crime prevention

Section 2

Professional detective service

Section 3

Provincial and local government

Experience of provinces. Political issue posing what to do about Rel. Mect. Provincial secretariat and area of commissioners

Rationale (1) Crime prevention to secretariat as opposed to area commissioner’s operational concern

    1. integrated justice system

Redistribution of resources in ----------

Section 4

Why is the private security not addressed in the white paper?

The document assumes that crime is only in the boarders of South Africa and does not say anything about Trans National crime

ICD should be below the Minister and not on the same level

Section 5

The role of CPF’s (page 28) - why is there social crime prevention

SAPS is not visible enough to be playing critical and assuming responsibility at a local level.

Appendix: Summary of Draft White Paper: prepared by Parliamentary Research Unit





Introduction and Section I. Confronting Crime in a Democratic South Africa

Policing in a democracy demands a new approach. Accountability and civilian oversight continue to be key components of the policy agenda to ensure that the police function within a human rights framework and protect citizens who come in contact with the law. However, it has become increasingly clear that the public requires, in addition to this, a professional and effective service by policing agencies that provide protection from those who perpetrate crime. The focus of accountability is now primarily to ensure effective service delivery to the public.

The White Paper outlines two central priorities to achieving a safer and more secure society. These are:

1. Improved law enforcement

2. Increased crime prevention (especially social crime prevention that is aimed at combating the root causes of crime).

These two approaches are not mutually exclusive and indeed the efficacy of one relies on the effectiveness of the other.

The implications for the Department of Safety and Security of this two pronged approach are far reaching. It calls for an increased concentration on law enforcement within the police service itself. It also requires the involvement of a wide range of new role-players in the arena of crime prevention.

Section II. Policy priority: Law enforcement in a democracy

To increase the ability of law enforcement agencies to provide effective security, the following is required within the police service:

1. Improving criminal investigations

The goal is to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of criminal investigations. Specific interventions include: · Increase the numbers of detectives · Improve and extend current detective training · Enhance the detective management function to improve deployment and performance · Improve the collection, analysis and management of crime information and intelligence · Develop clear criteria for the establishment of specialized investigation units · Shift responsibility for less serious crimes to other institutions both in and outside the police service

2 Active visible policing

The goal is to target visible policing to address specific crimes and fears. This may be done through: · Preventative patrols: a constant uniformed police presence · Directed patrols: deployment of police at a specific location for a limited period and purpose · Sector policing: division of area into smaller components and full time deployment of police in each sector · High density policing: saturation of problem areas to facilitate stabilization

Capacity in this regard should be supplemented through partnerships with local government.

3. Providing adequate service to victims

The goal is to improve the quality of service to victims. The White Paper outlines some guidelines for good practice in serving and protecting victims.

Section III. Policy Priority: Ensuring effective crime prevention

Crime prevention programmes may be targeted at offenders, victims or the environment. These target groups or areas can be reached through social crime prevention strategies which fall into one or more of the following broad areas: · Developmental crime prevention: address the factors contributing to delinquency and violent offending · Situation crime prevention: diminish environmental opportunities for crime · Community crime prevention: localized community driven programmes

The White Paper describes that the key for implementing crime prevention is at the provincial and local levels. However, national leadership, coordination, funds and guidelines are required to ensure effective implementation. A Crime Prevention Unit situated within the Department of Safety and Security at national level is proposed to fulfill this function. The main functions of the Crime Prevention Unit will be to achieve social crime prevention and integrating criminal justice by: · Establishing a national vision and identification of priorities (through research, monitoring and information component) · Mobilizing other government departments who have a role to play in crime prevention · Assisting provincial and local government in crime prevention by providing research, technical guidance, training and the sharing of best practice · Working in partnership with provincial, local government and civil society · Providing seed funding for targeted programmes · Continuos improvements to Criminal Justice System in specific areas · Assisting in managing and coordinating the prevention of certain priority crimes

Civil Society also has an important role to play in resourcing, supporting and conducting social crime prevention programmes.

Section IV. Institutional reform at national level

This section describes the transformation of structures at a national level to meet the goals of the White Paper. The focus of accountability is to ensure effective service delivery to the public.

Part of this process entails the reform of the policy planning and budgeting process within the Department. Determination and allocation of the budget has been shifted from the National Commissioner to the Secretary for Safety and Security. The Secretary is a civilian appointment and this mirrors international practice in democratic countries.

The key principles of the institutional reform are: · The separation of political decision making and operational command · Clear lines of responsibility and accountability and the alignment of policy, planning and budgeting · Relationships based on performance agreements to guarantee quality service delivery · Clear lines of command, control and communication within the operational structure (SAPS) · Enhance core business of SAPS (i.e. law enforcement) as well as the role of the Department in crime prevention · Providing incentives for improved service and disincentives for inadequate service

Thus what is suggested is a system of accountability based on "performance agreements" between those responsible for service delivery (e.g. SAPS and the Crime Prevention Unit) and those responsible for policing and regulation (the Minister supported by the Secretary).

The White Paper outlines a revised structure for the Department and identifies a number of important changes in the responsibilities of each role-player.


Accountable to the President, Cabinet and Parliament

1. Provides national policing policy and accounts for implementation of policy.*

2. Provides direction for implementing the NCPS and facilitating targeted social crime prevention.*

3. Appropriate and oversee the allocation and use of resources including the Budget and approve and authorize separate transfer payments to the SAPS and the Crime Prevention Unit.*

.* with the support of the Secretary


Public servant directed by the Minister to take responsibility for functions on behalf of the Minister. Accounting Officer for the Department of Safety and Security as a whole.

1. Devise policy and strategies which will guide activities of the agencies and monitor their implementation.

2. Internal negotiation, preparation and allocation of the budget and monitoring expenditure of the Department’s budget.

3. Negotiation, development, implementation and performance control of the performance agreements with regard to SAPS and CPU.

4. Provide ministerial support services, legal services and liaison functions.


State agency headed by a National Commissioner appointed by the President to fulfill the terms of the performance agreement. for a specified period. The National Commissioner is in executive command and control over the SAPS.

1. Formulation of an operational SAPS budget and the management, control and accountability for expenditure of this budget.

2. Management and control over police resources including human resources.

3. Ensuring a priority focus on criminal investigations, crime prevention through targeted visible policing and service delivery through support to victims of crime.


The Crime Prevention Unit will be responsible for continuing the work of the Department of Safety and Security in the NCPS and the Head who will be appointed on the basis of a performance agreement will be responsible for:

1. Research and policy development on social crime prevention.

2. Facilitation of crime prevention programmes through negotiation and provision of seed funding.

3. Monitoring the effectiveness of crime prevention programmes.

4. Facilitating and monitoring improvements in the integrated criminal justice system (NCPS function).



Section V. Institutional reform at Provincial and local level

The status quo of the provincial tier is maintained but it is suggested that responsibilities in terms of monitoring should be enhanced to ensure that they are able to deliver recommendations to inform the development of national policing policy. This refers to their ability to effectively monitor and thus assess the implementation of national policy in a provincial context. They are thus responsible for:

1. Initiating and coordinating social crime prevention programmes

2. Mobilizing resources for social crime prevention programmes

3. Coordinating a range of provincial functions

4. Evaluating and supporting local government crime prevention programmes

5. Implementing crime prevention programmes where local government is poorly resourced

The decentralization of policing to the lowest level is a core principle of national policing policy. Many local governments (in larger cities and towns) are considering the establishment of municipal police services which will perform important crime prevention functions as well as policing of municipal by laws and road traffic and related laws. However, local governments also have an important role to play in social crime prevention designed to meet the needs of particular communities. In delivering social crime prevention local governments should be responsible for:

1. Initiating, implementing and maintaining social crime prevention programmes in line with national and provincial guidelines

2. Developing programmes and projects targeting those most at risk as well as those most likely to offend

3. Leading and coordinating crime prevention strategies and programmes

4. Coordinating programmes through the establishment of local government crime prevention forums

5. Reorienting municipal services to facilitate crime prevention

In fulfilling these functions local government should work in conjunction with Community Police Forums (CPFs). It is now appropriate that the accountability functions of the CPFs be assumed by elected representatives of local communities and that the relationship between the two structure be strengthened by: ·

- Ex officio positions be set aside on CPFs for local government representatives ·

- CPF chairpersons to sit on local government crime prevention forums ·

- CPF to provide regular reports to local government ·

- Local government should direct the activities and monitor the composition of CPFs and resolve disputes

The role of CPFs should be:

1. To cooperate with local government to develop targeted social crime prevention programmes

2. To identify crime patterns and priorities and relay this information to local authorities and SAPS

3. To mobilize and organize community based campaigns and the resources to sustain them


No related


No related documents


  • We don't have attendance info for this committee meeting

Download as PDF

You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.

See detailed instructions for your browser here.

Share this page: