Defend Truth


Ban blue light brigades until the law is reformed to respect human rights


Professor Dr Omphemetse S Sibanda is a Professor of Law and the Executive Dean of the Faculty of Management and Law at the University of Limpopo. He holds a Doctor of Laws (in International Economic Law) from North West University, a Master of Laws from Georgetown University Law Centre, US; and an LLB (Hon) and B Juris from the then Vista University, Soweto Campus.

Following the Joburg highway assault, there’s only one option that will benefit justice, the rule of law and respect of human rights: Ban the general use of blue lights by the VIP Protection Services until the law is changed to define what constitutes an emergency.

In what is now called the Joburg highway assault, the South African public witnessed an extraordinary movie-like scene of police officers who are part of the security team protecting South African Deputy President Paul Mashatile going in heavy-handed on unidentified civilians and stomping on them.

The civilians were basically beaten up in public for all to see, perhaps to send a stern warning that the roads belong to the “blue light brigade”, to show they have absolute priority in traffic to force you out of the way.

The term “blue light brigade” is used for the SAPS VIP Protection Services and could be used to refer to other road users who have exemptions under traffic regulations.

For many observers, these events have come to be the defining symbol of police regression into lawlessness and the propensity of “blue light police” on our roads to bully citizens with impunity.

The scene was extraordinary, given that one of the biggest killers on South African roads is undoubtedly arrogance and/or aggression.

The incident made international headlines in news media such as Al Jazeera and Fox News. The blue light brigades have now earned themselves the title of Road Bullies.

The blue light brigade members’ actions remind one of the five Memphis police officers charged with murder after video footage emerged of them kicking and punching a motorist, Tyre Nichols, for several minutes at a stop sign as he cried out for his mother while restrained.

No human-rights-respecting person can accept the spectacle of civilians coming under attack by police officers appointed to protect and serve the public, no matter the circumstances.

Regulations and responsibilities

Yes, Regulation 308(h) of the National Road Traffic Regulations, 2000, provides that, “No person driving or having a vehicle on a public road shall fail to give an immediate and absolute right of way to a vehicle sounding a device or bell or displaying an identification lamp in terms of section 58(3) or 60 or Regulation 176.”

But these exemptions come with responsibilities. Section 58(3) permits the driver of an emergency vehicle, a traffic officer, and duly authorised drivers, as well as a “person appointed in terms of the South African Police Service Act… who drives a vehicle in the carrying out of his or her duties” to disregard the directions of a road traffic sign displayed in the prescribed manner.

But the driver must drive the vehicle concerned “with due regard to the safety of other traffic”.

Section 60 allows for certain drivers to exceed the speed limit, subject to the safety of other road users and a visible warning. Notable is that Regulation 176 authorises a member of the SAPS (along with a member of a municipal police service, a traffic officer, and a member of the South African National Defence Force performing police functions) to use a lamp emitting a blue light in the exercise of their duties.

Interestingly, even the South African Human Rights Commission has expressed concern about the usage of blue lights while “disregarding safety and traffic regulations and basic human rights”.

“Notwithstanding the provision that authorises the usage of blue lights for emergency purposes, the Commission is, however, concerned that certain incidents seem to suggest that the usage of blue lights is sometimes grossly abused. The violation of traffic rules has an impact on the provision of right to life as enshrined in the Constitution. The special concession granted for blue-light usage should not override the minimum safety and traffic rules that apply to all road users,” the commission said in a 2012 media statement.

Overdue amendments

Legislative amendments of the National Road Traffic Act 93 of 1996 with regard to privileges given to the blue light brigade are long overdue. Take, for instance, section 1(b) of the act, which states: “No person driving or having a vehicle on a public road shall… follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent having regard to the speed of such other vehicle and the traffic on and the condition of the roadway, or more closely than is prescribed in these regulations”.

Unfortunately, members of the VIP Protection Services very seldom observe this provision as they drive fast and close to civilians ahead of their convoy.

You would think that they are driving on the German motorway, the Autobahn, where there is recommended speed limit of 130 km/h that is merely advisory.

A number of amendments to the National Road Traffic Act may include defining the term “emergency” and the framework of operational requirements.

The George Herald noted in 2014, “In 2010 the Western Cape’s provincial traffic legislation banned the use of blue lights for all government vehicles unless there’s a ‘genuine’ emergency, such as the threat of assassination. Should we do the same?”

Accountability now

Some authorities and legal commentators pre-emptively — and quite expectedly so — pointed to the constitutional provision that everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty with regard to the law enforcement members involved in the Joburg highway assault.

One needs to highlight the apparent departures by law enforcement from a commitment to promote the rule of law, including respecting the rights and freedoms of citizens. The taint of official brutality meted out on citizens — regardless of race — is something that cannot be wished away and will further erode the trust of the public in the South African law enforcement agencies meant to protect them

There is a need for accountability now. The public or those at the receiving end of the blue light brigade conduct are not without legal recourse. The victims of the Joburg highway assault, for instance, can lay charges of assault, assault with the intent to cause grievous bodily harm, and others.

If it is difficult to identify individual alleged perpetrators, the principle of common purpose can be used against the blue light brigade in question, even those that did not alight from the VIP Protection Services car.

On the other hand, the blue light brigade members such as those in this case might argue that they are exempt from such action because they paid due regard to road safety and aver that they fall within the exemptions of this section in that “due regard” was paid to the safety of other road users, or raise other grounds of justification such as acting in an official capacity.

But, there is already a precedent, with the conviction and sentencing to an effective five years in prison for reckless driving of Joseph Semitjie, the driver of the then Gauteng Housing MEC Humphrey Mmemezi.

Semitjie jumped a red light and collided with young motorcyclist Thomas Ferreira, causing serious head injuries. The court in the case of Ndlela v S 2013 (unreported, KZP), recognised that reckless driving in the circumstances could not be condoned.

In particular, it found that there was no emergency as the probability that the MEC would be late for an appointment did not qualify as an emergency. Also, the fact that a driver is entitled to use a blue light and siren in itself did not constitute authority to ignore traffic rules or infringe on the rights of other road users.

If the blue light brigade and the VIP Protection Services continue to operate as they are doing, with total disregard for the right of citizens and other road users, who needs the police to protect and serve communities? 

There is only one option that will benefit justice, the rule of law and respect of human rights for all: Ban the general use of blue lights by the Presidential Protection Unit and VIP Protection Services until the law is changed to define what entails an emergency for these units.

Let them learn to be on time for meetings and related engagements for once in their lives without having to bully other motorists on our national roads. DM


Comments - Please in order to comment.

  • Deva Chetty says:

    We are quickly deteriorating into a police state , where persons in power are elevated to levels where they remain unaccountable to the rules and laws that apply to the general population – this takes us closer to a regime that is a law upon itself – our politicians lack moral fortitude and have forgotten where we have come from – human right violations and a brutal past that characterized the general South African landscape – we have quickly got back to this – there is more than enough evidence to suggest we have clearly lost our moral compass- its time to get rid of the head – because the ‘fish rots from the head’

  • Robert Pegg says:

    This article totally makes sense. Blue lights should be banned on official vehicles other than emergency service vehicles. These cowboys think they are above the law when charging around for no apparent reason. Politicians are not gods and should not be treated like they are.

  • Jennifer Hughes says:

    Certainly, their reckless driving is a problem and we have a bunch of technicalities in the law perhaps making it difficult to prosecute them, but NOWHERE in our law is anyone ever allowed to pull people from their vehicles and assault them. I would love to see the blue light brigades banned, but let’s not lose sight that this is a step further than the general abuse!

  • Neil Grobler says:

    Could not agree more, Prof. Amendment to law for accountability for the VIP Services.
    I would like to have some of your insight to the accountability of the one that they were serving at the time. Presumably sitting in the car , watching and condoning their actions. Surely there should be blame there too. In the least, the man is an accessory. At most, responsible.
    I made the assumption that the man was present, if not, then what could possibly account for the emergency of their travel ??

  • laufraser says:

    It’s just a clear indicator of the level of thuggery and high handed behaviour of those that serve those in power. It’s a snap shot of an SA mind set

  • Stef Viljoen Viljoen says:

    Couldn’t agree more. This is being used as a “perk” like their free housing, generators, flights, food and the like. With the blue light brigades endangering other people directly, maybe we should take this to court? Yes, the guys need protection but this does not improve their safety.

  • Sam Shu says:

    The VIP protection Services blue lights elevate politicians to be something other than citizens. There is almost zero event imaginable for which a politician’s attendance is a life or death emergency. SA is supposed to be an egalitarian state; these people should not have more or better rights than the rest of us

    • Ken Kesner says:

      Yeah, and of what value are politicians compared to those of real value to society such as nurses, teachers, doctors, streetsweepers and REAL policeman who serve with conviction and are not bullying thugs

  • Libby De Villiers says:

    This is just another case of thuggery and gangsterism by South African politicians. This is what they are and what they do to stay in power. And the violence spirals down and is now part of our lives.
    If you can steal from the poor, if money is your only objective and you cannot reason this barbaric behaviour is enevitable.

  • Glyn Morgan says:

    Great article, thanks Omphemetse S Sibanda.

    It will take years to amend this law, “Regulation 308(h) of the National Road Traffic Regulations, 2000”.

    Why don’t each individual Province ban “blue light police” in the same way as the Western Cape has done? It must be a faster and more effective way of getting rid of the deadly hooligans?

    The Western Cape thinks for itself.

  • David Pennington says:

    One has to use a blue light in order to get to the next trough

  • Rob Scott says:

    Ban them – they are nothing more than bullies. Its become a status symbol.

  • Rory Macnamara says:

    Zapiro’s cartoon says it all, as he always does, but this one hits one in the stomach because that is what politicians and their hooligan guards. think of citizens of this country. suggest huge A1 blow ups be made and placed at every ANC rally and office especially Luthuli House and then at every polling booth at election time.

  • Ivan van Heerden says:

    Limit VIP protection services to a certain number of officers. So the president, vice president, the supreme court justices and maybe the minister of finance can get VIP blue lights. Everyone else and this includes the entirely useless MEC’s, Premiers, mayors etc can foot the bill for non SAPS VIP protection themselves. Blue lights are not permitted on any of those vehicles. It has become a standing joke and entirely epitomises the absolute arrogance and disregard with which the ANC views the South African Public

  • To those who believe this is an isolated incident **WAKE UP** below quoted from Sowetanlive: In June 2008, a VIP officer in Jacob Zuma’s armed convoy fired three shots at the vehicle of an 84-year-old motorist, who was deemed a “threat”.
    In November 2008, a VIP officer attached to the KZN Social Development MEC’s security detail, shot the tyre off a Mazda that did not move out of his way quickly enough, causing a head-on collision with a bakkie. At least six people were injured, but the MEC’s driver simply sped off.
    In January 2009, a VIP officer in Kgalema Motlanthe’s cavalcade shot an unarmed motorist after he “got too close” in the traffic, and officers subsequently seized and deleted material from an SABC cameraman who recorded part of the incident.
    In April 2009, a VIP unit officer on his way to collect the m ayor of Msunduzi, spat in the eye of a woman motorist.
    In February 2010, UCT student Chumani Maxwele was arrested at gunpoint by President Zuma’s VIP unit and detained for 24 hours because he allegedly gestured at the President’s motorcade.
    In October, the South African Human Rights Commission found police had violated Maxwele’s rights by arresting and detaining him. In March 2010, I wrote to President Jacob Zuma requesting an urgent meeting regarding the abuse of power by blue light bullies on our roads after the arrest of Maxwele, and a separate incident involving an assault on journalist Tshepo Lesole by the President’s VIP security unit.

Please peer review 3 community comments before your comment can be posted

MavericKids vol 3

How can a child learn to read if they don't have a book?

81% of South African children aged 10 can't read for meaning. You can help by pre-ordering a copy of MavericKids.

For every copy sold we will donate a copy to Gift of The Givers for children in need of reading support.