A new Institute for Security Studies (ISS) analysis shows that police face little chance of being sanctioned internally by the South African Police Service (SAPS) for disciplinary offences.
The analysis provides context to the acquittal by a SAPS disciplinary process of eight VIP Protection Unit officers for assaulting members of the public. In July 2023, officers were filmed dragging a driver and two passengers out of a vehicle, repeatedly kicking them as they lay on the ground, then rapidly leaving the scene.
Although the eight police members face criminal charges for the assaults, the SAPS is unable or unwilling to convict any of them despite the video recording of the incident. The criminal case against the eight officials resumed on 10 June.
The decision not to sanction police in a case with such strong evidence will encourage SAPS members to disregard standards regarding the use of force. Excessive and unnecessary force will become even more entrenched than it already is, with the police seen by the public as merely another group of thugs and criminals.
The failure to uphold professional standards undermines efforts to build public respect and trust in the police. The SAPS has a legal duty to prevent excessive and unnecessary force. Neglecting this obligation encourages disrespect for the law across the entire spectrum of policing in South Africa. It is also an affront to those police who strive to strengthen public trust in the police by promoting the professionalism of the SAPS.
The use of excessive force is not a problem of a few ‘bad apples’ but a routine part of everyday policing in many places across South Africa.
International and South African examples of police brutality show that the foremost perpetrators are frequently active frontline officers. Senior commanders, particularly those with a limited grasp of effective policing, often rely on these officers to get results, so there is little possibility that action will be taken against them.
Faced with resource and personnel constraints, it may seem easier for the SAPS to neglect constitutional provisions forbidding torture and instead support the public right ‘to be free from all forms of violence from either public or private sources.’
Because the criminal justice system is often seen as dysfunctional, many believe the police need to use excessive force in response to high levels of violent crime. Public expressions of support for the killing by police of suspects are one reflection of this. But this support encourages the deterioration of policing standards and is a poisoned chalice for the SAPS.
In the unlikely event that they are charged for ill-discipline, almost 80% of SAPS members will ultimately face no sanction (see graph). ISS analysis of data in SAPS annual reports and the Safety and Security Sectoral Bargaining Council (SSSBC) shows that 6 154 (77.4%) of 7 946 disciplinary cases against SAPS members ended without sanction.
Excessive force – from fairly routine assaults to more serious forms of torture – is far more widely tolerated in the SAPS than is officially acknowledged. Disciplinary sanctions aren’t often applied for these infringements. Other police offences such as corruption and rape are more likely to result in internal convictions.
The Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID) received 3 176 reports of serious assault and 273 reports of torture in the 2023/24 year. The SAPS reports 55 disciplinary convictions for serious assault and 10 for the use of ‘unlawful force’ or other ill-treatment of a person in custody. It does not indicate the sanctions imposed for these offences.
Many victims believe there will be few consequences if they report assaults or torture by police and that it isn’t worth the trouble. Victims and their families are often not able to take legal action, partly because victims themselves may be under arrest for alleged crimes. Reported cases are likely just the tip of the iceberg.
And few victims of police assault or torture lay successful civil claims. The vast majority of these claims are for wrongful arrest, which lawyers find easier to prove than police violence. Most police members are not deterred by civil claims, as those that succeed are paid for by public money from the SAPS budget.
The trial of the eight VIP Protection Unit members resumes tomorrow. But accountability for the misuse of force by police is unlikely in the criminal courts, even when recorded on video. Proving a case beyond a reasonable doubt is a much higher standard of proof than in the SAPS disciplinary system. IPID and the National Prosecuting Authority often cannot meet this standard, particularly when the accused has a capable legal team.
At the SAPS Policing Summit in April, discussions consistently highlighted the weakness of the disciplinary system. Police serving in disciplinary hearings as presiding officers or prosecutors (employer representatives) are frequently poorly acquainted with relevant aspects of the law. This was confirmed at the summit by police trade unions, which often represent accused SAPS members.
The SAPS disciplinary system must set clear standards regarding police conduct. Many members allege that disciplinary measures are not consistently carried out and are strongly influenced by favouritism or other factors. Presiding officers may also be colleagues of those facing disciplinary charges.
South Africa’s police leaders should commit to upholding high standards of conduct and professionalism among their members. Doing so requires a more effective SAPS disciplinary system and a commitment to implementing policies that support the reasonable and necessary use of force, and prevent excessive force by police.
Written by David Bruce, Independent Researcher and ISS Consultant.
Republished with permission from ISS Africa. The original article can be found here.
