Police brutality comes as a surprise? Really?
- Pierre de Vos
- 01 Mar 2013 09:40 (South Africa)
It is reported that Mozambican taxi driver Mido Macia lay for hours bleeding to death, alone in a cell at a police station in Daveyton, on the East Rand, without medical attention. For nearly four hours, the 27-year-old — the sole breadwinner for his one-year-old son, Sergio, and 23-year-old wife, Jacquelina – lay dying in a crumpled heap, in his own blood and faeces. His alleged crime: refusing to obey police officers who ordered him to stop blocking traffic with his vehicle in Daveyton township’s main street.
The Presidency issued a statement condemning the brutal killing. “Members of the South African police service are required to operate within the confines of the law in executing their duties. The visuals of the incident are horrific, disturbing and unacceptable. No human being should be treated in that manner,” said President Zuma. National Police Commissioner Riah Phiyega also expressed deep concern about the incident. Her spokesperson Brigadier Phuti Setati said: “The matter is viewed by the National Commissioner in a very serious light and it is strongly condemned.”
However, as the Council for the Advancement of the South African Constitution (CASAC) pointed out in a submission to the Marikana Commission of Inquiry, under the government of President Jacob Zuma there has been a “deliberate policy” that involves encouraging greater use of force by members of the SAPS. This policy has beens advanced through the promotion of a semi-formal and illegal doctrine of “maximum force”. CASAC points to several statements and actions to back up this claim, pointing to a statement made by the then Deputy Minister of Safety and Security, Susan Shabangu on 9 April 2008 to the effect that:
You must kill the bastards (criminals) if they threaten you or the community. You must not worry about the regulations. I want no warning shots. You have one shot and it must be a kill shot. I want to assure the police station commissioners and policemen and women from these areas that they have permission to kill these criminals. I will not tolerate any pathetic excuses for you not being able to deal with crime, you have been given guns, now use them. If criminals dare to threaten the police or the livelihood or lives of innocent men, women and children, then they must be killed.
Deputy Minister Shabangu’s words were not repudiated by the South African government. In fact on 11 April 2008, two days after Shabangu made this statement, Mr Jacob Zuma (then President of the ANC) said:
If you have a deputy minister saying the kinds of things that the deputy minister was saying, this is what we need to happen. What the deputy minister is saying is: what we are to be doing is dealing with the criminals rather than talking about it.
Minister of Safety and Security Nathi Mthethwa told Parliament’s Select Committee on Security on 12 November 2008 that the people involved must be dealt with.
We don’t believe that, when you are faced… with criminals armed with sophisticated weaponry, the police’s task would be to take out some human rights charter. Because we are in the field, we are in the killing field, where criminals are killing law-abiding citizens. Now we are saying to the police that we ourselves have an obligation as well to strengthen the arm of these task forces. So that they are able, on the field, to teach those people a lesson — fight fire with fire. There’s no other way on that.
Soon afterwards, Minister Mthethwa proposed amendments to Section 49 of the Criminal Procedure Act, the legal provision dealing with the use of lethal force “for arrest”, in order to make it easier for the SAPS to shoot and kill people suspected by the police of being involved in crime. The amendment to Section 49 that came into force at the end of September 2012, broadened the powers of the police to use lethal force and contributed to an atmosphere of impunity.
In a subsequent press interview Mr Mthethwa also presented the fact that large numbers of police were being killed as one of the reasons why it was necessary to amend Section 49 despite the fact that the law already authorised the use of lethal force in self-defence. As CASAC points out, no evidence has been presented at any point to demonstrate that amending Section 49 will improve the safety of police. “We are at war with criminals,” Mthethwa is quoted as saying.
When Bheki Cele was appointed as National Commissioner of the SAPS in July 2009, he already had a reputation for advocating the aggressive use of force and continued to openly do so during the initial months after he was appointed. CASAC again:
For instance, in an address to the Pretoria Press Club in September 2009, Mr Cele is reported to have said that “criminals were heavily armed with R5 assault rifles” and that “The only language that R5s understand is R5s. The police do not have to think twice and lose their lives”. The statements made by President Zuma at a specially convened meeting [in September 2009] with more than 1,000 police station commissioners to the effect that police should not have to fire warning shots when they were faced with an immediate threat to their lives. (President Zuma’s statements reflected his ignorance of the issue. There is no requirement anywhere in South African law or police regulations for warning shots to be fired when facing an imminent or immediate threat to one’s life.)
These were not the only members of government who encouraged the use of maximum force by the SAPS. During this period the then Deputy-Minister of Police, Fikile Mbalula, stated that the SAPS will show “no mercy” to criminals and will be “taking the war to the criminals”. The police should “shoot the bastards” and it was unavoidable that civilians would be killed in the cross-fire between police and criminals.
After a public outcry resulting form the increasing lawlessness of the SAPS, in particular two killings by police during this period — that of Olga Kekana (11 October 2009) and a three-year-old boy, Atlegang Phalane (7 November 2009) – the government seemed to tone to down its rhetoric. Government ministers began to use less crude rhetoric, but there was no change in the policy to use maximum force. But it continued to be the policy of government to promote more aggressive use of force by the police and this was accompanied by a sharp increase in the number of deaths of people at the hands of the police.
For example in late November 2009 Minister Mthethwa indicated that he maintained the view that what was called for was a “fight fire with fire” approach. A decision was also taken to re-militarise the ranks of the SAPS. The decision was implemented early in 2010. On 13 September 2012 President Zuma told Parliament that the militarisation of police ranks “had empowered the police to act decisively” and that this had resulted in a lower crime rate.
It was in the wake of this enabling environment that the Marikana massacre took place. No wonder Amnesty International has expressed concerns about police brutality, including torture and extrajudicial killings, in South Africa. Its 2012 annual report documented allegations against the South African police of excessive force, torture, rape and “extrajudicial executions”. There has also been concern about brutal training methods for the police. According to Peter Jordi from the Wits Law Clinic “[Police] Torture is spiralling out of control. It is happening everywhere.” No wonder the Institute for Security Studies in Pretoria has reported that the number of people shot dead by police doubled in the four years to 2010. Deaths in police custody or resulting from police action numbered 860 in 2009-10, against an average of 695 deaths a year from 2003-2008.
Of course, middle-class people who are fearful of crime and do not bear the brunt of the violence and lawlessness of the SAPS tend to ignore the belligerent statements by politicians and the invisible war on the poor conducted by an insecure, sometimes corrupt, and often badly trained police service. It is only when the brutality that has become endemic is captured on video that members of the chattering classes and the politicians who serve their interest suddenly express outrage and shock at the police brutality.
Spare me the hypocrisy. DM
PS: I borrowed heavily from the excellent CASAC submission to the Marikana Commission of Inquiry when writing this piece.
- Uganda: why quiet diplomacy is a devastating betrayal of gay men and lesbians on the continent
- All hail independent thought
- Pistorius on TV: The public's interest vs. the public interest
- In the age of consent, the buck stops with Number One
- DA vs. ANC: The importance of political tolerance
- Campaign fever: the ground rules
- Let’s talk about freedom of speech
- DAgang's divorce: The finer sticking points
- Challenging IPID’s appointment: Always a bridesmaid, never a McBride
- Democratic internal party processes? Hmmm, unlikely.
- Why redress measures are not racist
- News flash, folks: discrimination IS illegal
- Water is life, but the struggle for it is deadly
- Changing the Constitution: much ado about nothing
- Mandela legacy: Reconciliation – a process, not a once-off event
- To call Mandela a saint is to dishonour his memory
- Love me tender: Why ‘it’s complicated’ applies to corrupt private tender processes too
- Nkandla report - the incontrovertible facts no smokescreens can cover
- The colonial roots of conferring silk on advocates
- Structural racism: the invisible evil
- E-toll civil disobedience reveals lack of respect for democracy
- We recognise sex and gender as classifications, so why not race?
- Nkandla Report blackout: It is all about PW Botha's law
- Elections are coming: Can we have some substance, please?
- The JSC: It’s not all bad, and here’s why
- The remembrance and forgetting of things past
- Nkandla: Untangling that rather sticky web
- Employment equity: the trick is in how it’s implemented
- Justice: that elusive prize, and how to get it
- Elections: The tightrope of fairness
- Teen sex: The law can’t replace parenting
- The Hlophe conundrum, revisited
- Khayelitsha policing: among the shambles and turf wars, it’s the residents who suffer
- Media freedom is a right that benefits all
- Attempts to discredit Madonsela could backfire
- The Mdluli matter: Nxasana’s first big test
- Sparing the rod: what it really entails
- Secrecy Bill: a touch more confusion, and a glimmer of hope
- Zuma's Secrecy Bill move: The Darker Side
- Hoffman’s complaint: why it was bound to fail
- Freedom of expression – and the quest for living meaningfully
- When a joke is not a joke
- The bad news: Qwelane’s constitutional challenge might just work
- Restoring the Electoral Commission: What happens next?
- A vote of no confidence is not to be taken lightly, by majority or minority
- The murky marriage of money and politics
- FF+ vs. EFF: doomed to fail
- Spy Tapes: A clear and simple case
- Hell is other people (trolling the Internet)
- Colour me irrational
- Women’s day – just another day for men to call the shots
- Arms Deal Commission: It’s the moment to make or break
- Marikana Commission: More questions than answers
- The court of individual identity
- Pius Langa: A man who knew the meaning of change
- Dear Film and Publications Board, please review your own rules
- Animal antics, and the separation of powers doctrine
- Hypocrisy fit for a king
- Take care with those ‘insults’
- ‘Top secret’ Nkandla report: On the highway to embarrassment
- Traditional leadership: Cat can look at a king
- Equal Education: The Minister doth protest too much
- Willing buyer, willing seller works… If you have a lifetime to wait
- Polygyny: Our human rights half-job
- Trial by media? Actually, that’s impossible
- Pistorius: The horror of a broken (white) body
- Oh what a tangled legal quagmire... when first we practise an NDPP to hire?
- Breytenbach: too little fear, favour and prejudice?
- The curious case of the pastor punished for honesty
- What’s that smell? Must be the name droppings.
- KZN University: A storm in a (Zulu) teacup
- Nkandla: The details will, and should, be made public
- Great speech vs. hate speech: how it really works
- Cape Town evictions: Brutal, inhumane, and totally unlawful
- The new, tamer Secrecy Bill: Still not constitutional
- Zuma and the Guptas: the ‘symbiosis’ continues
- Discrimination is illegal. When will we learn this?
- It’s not a democracy if our children aren’t equal
- An upside-down world: What would happen if we cared about the ‘others’?
- JSC: Let’s inject some common sense, shall we?
- Rose-tinted amnesia: The struggle to ‘rebrand’ SA’s Apartheid past
- Cardinal Napier: the plot thickens
- Redefining ‘merit’: first task for a transformed JSC
- The dating race
- Putting the ‘dread’ into ‘dreadlocks’
- Liars, damn liars, and the SA government
- Constitution clear on troops in the CAR: Zuma must talk to Parliament
- SA in CAR: the questions that remain
- Why are South African soldiers dying in CAR?
- Covering up sexual abuse is a crime, Cardinal
- Nkandla: Oh, what a tangled web we weave…
- The education MEC, children's heads, and a knobkerrie
- In black and white: the truth about ‘unconstitutional’ race quotas in universities
- Losing battles: Why the FMF doesn’t stand a chance
- Democracy vs. traditional leadership: the delicate ballet
- Police brutality comes as a surprise? Really?
- Sometimes a Tweeter is just a Twit
- Lady Justice’s scales appear to be faulty
- Pistorius trial: The legal principles that will decide the case
- Oscar Pistorius case: Bail isn’t denied as easily as you think
- Public opinion: Is there really any danger of prejudice against Oscar?
- All we know is that a woman is dead
- The secret history: Unearthing the mysterious Presidential Manual
- Sexwale abuse allegations: Very much our business
- SA’s rape epidemic: The limitations of outrage
- Will the real freedom of expression please stand up?
- But what of the people of Khayelitsha?
- WWE Smackdown: Zille vs. TNA edition
- Nkandla: Everything that's wrong with the Zuma government
- Nkandla: The spinning, mincing, dicing - and the report we're not allowed to read
- Beyond all (t)reason
- Judicial transformation: South Africa's appalling non-commitment
- The criminal stupidity of criminalising teen sex
- Careful, Mr Mthembu: The re-emergence of Apartheid's 'volksvreemdes' mentality
- Unequal education: the problem with providing learning for all
- SA troops in CAR: Why we should all be worried
- Mulholland column: Ignorance squared is still ignorance
- Elective processes: Something is rotten in the kingdom of the ANC
- Outa application: Courts can't fix political processes
- Chaskalson, SACP and the Constitution: Don’t touch me on my liberalism
- Carlisle and car key confiscation: Don't go with the (traffic) flow
- Dear Contralesa, please approach your nearest healer for a diagnosis
- Simelane: You can't end what never truly began
- Playing by the rules: The balancing act of Judge Dennis Davis
- Sunlight is the best disinfectant
- Lenasia: The haunting abandonment of humanity
- Lies, damn lies, and Zuma's 'bond'
- Show us the money, Mr Zuma
- The opposition doth protest too much: Why the ANC is hellbent on crushing debate
- Note to Zuma: Try commanding respect, not demanding it
- Dear Nxesi, your fantasy is damaging South Africa’s reality
- Running the Gauntlett: Why the struggle for appointment?
- Affirmative action: a decidedly middle-class problem
- Hate crime: there is no such thing as an excuse - ever
- Mfeketo and Zuma: You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours?
- Ramaphosa: Where does corruption begin and end?
- The Zuma recordings: SA is the crayfish, corruption the boiling water
- No safety in numbers: Why a bigger opposition isn't a stronger opposition
- Specs, lies and audiotape - the hidden Zuma recordings
- The ANC on school closures: can they win?
- Thuli Madonsela: The difference between 'unpopularity' and 'misconduct'
- Democracy: it starts in Parliament
- The National Key Points Act: not just unconstitutional, but totally invalid
- Simelane and 'rational' thought
- Halt the witch-hunt, Minister
- Home is where the taxpayer's money is
- Will Malema's case stand up in court?
- South Africa's Striking Miners: A Menace to Society? Or just to the middle class?
- E-tolling judgement: Sorry for Gauteng, but it's perfectly lawful
- Silence is golden - if the speakers are criticising the State
- Malema at the SANDF: Inappropriate? Yes. Illegal? No.
- Freedom of religion: not so free after all
- Whites against Woolworths: doth they protest too much?
- From the NPA with fear, favour - and prejudice
- Marikana murder charge withdrawal: the first glimmer of sanity
- Abuse, Inc: The 'miners made us do it' murder charge
- A marriage made in hell
- Lonmin's Farlam Commission: not bad, not bad at all
- Marikana: Avoidable, unconstitutional… and entirely predictable