Talk of human rights abuses by KZN SAPS ‘are baseless’

People gather at the Wonderkop Marikana commemoration rally near Rustenburg. Since the Marikana Massacre, the operations of the South African Police Service have been placed under serious public scrutiny. Each time there is a report of police gunning down suspected criminals, the massacre is invoked – rightly or wrongly. Picture: Motshwari Mofokeng / Independent News / File

By Bheki Mngomezulu

From August 11 to 16, 2012, there was a simmering feud between mineworkers at Lonmin Mine in the North-west province. Workers were demanding a minimum wage of R12,500, which employers were either unwilling or unable to pay.

After a tough altercation between union leaders and management, the saturation point was reached when the mine management called the police to intervene. In the process, no less than 44 people lost their lives while over 70 more were injured. Moreover, an estimated 250 people were arrested on accusations that they had played different roles in the feud which ensued.

This incident was one of its kind in the post-apartheid era where the police and employees clashed openly in this manner. It painted the country in a bad light. The top brass in the police force was accused of what was dubbed ‘extrajudicial killings’. In their own defence, the police claimed that they had no choice but to use maximum force when their lives were in danger,

Whatever the correct version was, the reality is that this incident ruined relations between them and the community. To this day, some families have not yet recovered from this dark episode in a democratic South Africa. Politicians use it to blame one another for political expediency.

Since this incident, the operations of the South African Police Service (SAPS) have been placed under serious public scrutiny. Each time there is a report of police gunning down suspected criminals, the Marikana massacre is invoked – rightly or wrongly.

This is the historical context within which the increased number of incidents whereby SAPS members kill suspected criminals is being frowned upon in certain quarters while being applauded by others who believe that the use of excessive force is warranted given the brutality of the criminals who kill innocent people unprovoked.

Others cite crime statistics as the reason it is justifiable for the police to kill suspects. Weaknesses in the country’s justice system, which leads to criminals walking free even after committing heinous crimes, are also used to justify these killings.

The key question is: Whose human rights matter? Do SAPS members have more rights than other citizens to use maximum force against criminals instead of arresting them as should be the case? Do criminals have more rights than both SAPS members and members of the community as though they have the license to kill innocent people so rampantly? Importantly, under what circumstances are human rights either respected or forfeited?

These are some of the critical questions which should guide all those who comment about the spate of SAPS killings of suspected criminals. Responses must be rational, not emotional.

Since the beginning of April 2024, KZN SAPS shot and killed no less than 40 suspected criminals. This number adds to many more people killed before this date. Consequently, there is now a concern that KZN SAPS use a trigger-happy approach to policing. The shoot-to-kill practice seems to be gaining momentum in this province and some are asking the question why?

Within this context, the issue of human rights has been invoked by those who are opposed to what they call ‘rampant killings’ which are carried out by the police. They are silent about the killings that are carried out by criminals.

Indeed, Chapter 2 Section 7(1) of The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa states that “This Bill of Rights is a cornerstone of democracy in South Africa. It enshrines the rights of all people in our country and affirms the democratic values of human dignity, equality, and freedom.”

Now, if the Bill enshrines the rights ‘of all the people’, does this not include the rights of the SAPS members? Should they fold their arms when being attacked by criminals? Does the Bill of Right not include the rights of South African citizens and other nationals who reside in South Africa whose lives should be protected? If the answer is in the affirmative, then blanket accusation against SAPS members in KZN is unjustifiable.

In any analysis, context matters. Each time the Minister of Police releases crime statistics, areas like Inanda and Umlazi in KZN top the list in terms of serious criminal activities. Secondly, in cases where the police kill criminals, they do so responding to attacks on them by the suspects.

Another factor which leads to these killings is poor training of the police. Some tamper with evidence when they are at the crime scene. By the time the case goes to court judges find that there is insufficient evidence to enable them to prosecute suspects. They then set these suspects free. The latter tend to go back and commit more crime. Out of anger and frustration, SAPS members gun them down when they resist arrest. They do this to avoid having to arrest the same suspects several times – risking their own lives in the process.

The call for an independent probe on the actions of SAPS members in KZN comes from this context. But since the country already has the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID), this call has no basis. At the time when the country is experiencing financial challenges, another independent probe is unjustifiable.

Instead, certain actions must be taken earnestly to address this issue of increased numbers of SAPS killing suspects.

Firstly, SAPS must be capacitated. This includes specialised training in collecting evidence at the crime scene. Secondly, crime intelligence must be beefed up to enable SAPS to pick up plans by criminals and stop them before they execute their plans.

Thirdly, civic education is needed to ensure that members of the community understand their role in combating crimes instead of protecting criminals either out of fear or because they are family members or relatives. Fourthly, lessons should be drawn from other countries like Rwanda, Uganda, Zimbabwe, America, and Britain on how they deal with criminal activities.

Fifthly and lastly, within South Africa, loopholes in existing structures such as IPID should be addressed urgently.

* Prof Bheki Mngomezulu is the Director of the Centre for the Advancement of Non-Racialism and Democracy (CANRAD) at the Nelson Mandela University.

** The views expressed in this article are the writer’s and do not necessarily reflect the views The African