A combative look at public safety through the paradox of policing against the mandate of assigned competencies and delegated functions

A combative look at public safety at Local Government level, the paradox of policing against the backdrop of assigned competencies and delegated functions.

Introduction

The NMBM is the 9th ranked city for violent crime in the world.[1] This is an indictment against the city leaders. Did we fail the community? Are we compliant with the Constitutional objective of promoting “a safe and healthy environment”?[2]

Figure 1: The most violent cities in South Africa – with a new number 1 ranking among the worst of the worst in the world[3]

The level of crime and the newspaper headlines seems to support the assertion that drastic change is required. It is against this backdrop that we are still hearing narratives that local government public safety departments are not “real” service delivery components, and that their mandates are delegated and not assigned to municipalities within the constitutional frameworks.

My submission is that such narratives are misdirected. It stems from an academic outlook, rather than a policing or crime prevention viewpoint. It ignores the real dangers that the citizens face within the context of local government. It also negates the role that safe and secure environments have on direct capital investments and the impact on the gross domestic product.

There is a contrasting view from an accounting/human resource perspectives/professionals and policing experts on the organizational development of departments when it comes to dealing with crime and lawlessness. Although these disciplines are invaluable to correct sizing and budgeting, if that view seeks to limit the number of officers or members to prevent crime, it is submitted that such a limitation distorts the crime prevention and crime impact dimensions which citizens face at local government level.

Figure 2: ‘We’ve had enough of crime’[4]

Yes, it is accurate that crime prevention is the mandate of the SAPS, but the fact that the constitution permitted the local governments to operate policing components foster an understanding that the “founding fathers” envisaged policing to be closer to the people.

In South Africa the 1996 Constitution in schedule 4 and 5 sub-divides the list of concurrent and exclusive competencies into Parts A and B, with the latter listing the functional areas of municipalities.[5] The areas of competence creates the scope for the local government to impact meaningfully in preventing crime. The conditions that contribute to crime should be rigorously addressed at Local government level in order to promote effective crime prevention. This further ties into the “broken window” policing strategy by reducing the opportunity for crime to occur by eliminating the “minor” crimes or addressing bylaws effectively and in doing so creating limited opportunities for offenders to commit crime.

Sir Robert Peel[6] stated “the community is the police and the police the community” and this dictum finds a strange analogy within the above narrative. Policing should be closer to the people; this was envisaged with the Community Policing methodology within the SAPS and the paradigm shift from Force to Service and as such should we then not rather look to the local government policing arm to finally give credence to this noble idea of “community policing”.?

Core Ideals and principles are:

·?????? The goal is preventing crime, not catching criminals. If the police stop crime before it happens, we don’t have to punish citizens or suppress their rights.

·?????? The key to preventing crime is earning public support. Every community member must share the responsibility of preventing crime, as if they were all volunteer members of the force. They will only accept this responsibility if the community supports and trusts the police.

·?????? The police earn public support by respecting community principles. Winning public approval requires hard work to build reputation: enforcing the laws impartially, hiring officers who represent and understand the community, and using force only as a last resort.

·?????? To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment.

·?????? To recognize always that the power of the police to fulfill their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behavior, and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect.

·?????? To recognize always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing cooperation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws.

·?????? To recognize always that the extent to which the cooperation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives.

·?????? To seek and preserve public favor, not by pandering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humor, and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life.

·?????? To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public cooperation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective.

·?????? To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.

·?????? To recognize always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty.

·?????? To recognize always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them.[7]

When we take the above core principles and goals of policing into account, it should be clear that policing is not a “income generating function”. It should never be subjected to a sustainability exercise that seeks to validate its existence through its income generating prowess, even al local government level. Such a directive distorts the ethos of policing and will create animosity between the police and the public. Such animosity will lead to greater public distrust of the police and will inadvertently increase crime.

In conclusion, it should be noted that the world Bank estimated that crime cost South Africa in the region of R700 billion.[8] In a recently published report, the following was stated:

For 2023, this cost is conservatively estimated at R700 billion, nearly three times the amount government spends on healthcare and R600 million more than the entire Police budget itself

The figure 3[9] below gives a graphic representation:

It is posited that an evaluation of the above, will reveal a need to shift the crime prevention paradigm from a national focus area to a local government competency. This will allow for a greater adherence to the concept of community policing, and further it is submitted that this will create greater sense of safety. If managed correctly, it will impact positively in the alleviation of socio-economic ills that plague the communities by providing work opportunities in the policing and safety sector. This will have a positive impact on patriotism because the police will be the community and the community the police, as Sir Robert Peel envisaged all those years ago. Should make us think…

[1] https://www.politicsweb.co.za/politics/nmb-ranked-9th-most-dangerous-city-in-the-world--a

[2] S 152 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996.

[3] Businesstech staff writer “The most violent cities in South Africa – with a new number 1 ranking among the worst of the worst in the world” 14 March 2024 https://businesstech.co.za/news/lifestyle/760213/the-most-violent-cities-in-south-africa-with-a-new-number-1-ranking-among-the-worst-of-the-worst-in-the-world/ accessed 30 July 2024.

[4] Yolanda Palezweni “ ‘We’ve had enough of crime’ “ 14 July 2022 https://www.heraldlive.co.za/news/2022-07-14-weve-had-enough-of-crime/ accessed 31 July 2024.

?

[5] Nico Steytler “The powers of local government in decentralised systems of government: managing the 'curse of common competencies' https://repository.uwc.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10566/4747/The%20powers%20of%20local%20government%20in%20decentralized%20systems%20of%20government_managing%20the%20curse%20of%20common%20competencies.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

[6] Law Enforcement Action Partnership “Peelian Principles” accessed at https://lawenforcementactionpartnership.org/peel-policing-principles/ 2024/07/25.

[7] The above quoted principles and core ideals are vital to changing the face of policing. It is as relevant today, as it was in 1829. See fn 4.

[8] Codera Blog “World Bank estimates of cost of crime in SA” 23 November 2023 https://codera.co.za/wb-estimates-of-cost-of-crime-in-sa/ accessed 31 July 2024.

[9] See fn6 above.