Firearms Amnesty: SAPS briefing; with Deputy Minister

Meeting report

The Chairperson opened the virtual meeting and welcomed the Members and the delegation from the SA police Service (SAPS), including the Deputy Minister of Police. There were no apologies presented.

The purpose of the meeting was for the South African Police Service (SAPS) to brief the Committee on the progress of the firearm amnesty 2019/20 and to seek support for another amnesty period of six months. The second item on the agenda was for the Committee to adopt the minutes of its previous meetings.

The delegation from the SAPS included Mr Cassel Mathale (Deputy Minister of Police), Gen Khehla John Sitole (National Commissioner of the SAPS), Maj-General M Mamotheti (Acting Divisional Commissioner: Visible Policing), Lt-Gen S Masemole (Deputy National Commissioner: Policing), and Lt-Gen (Adv) A Khan (Divisional Commissioner: Legal and Policy Services).

Background and procedural issues regarding the notice:

The Chairperson stated that on 30 October 2019, the Committee approved the Firearms Amnesty for the period from 1 December 2019 to 31 May 2020. On 25 May 2020, the Committee received a notice of submission for approval of a further period of amnesty in terms of section 139(2)(c) of the FCA. Mr Bheki Cele, the Minister of Police, requested the Committee to consider and approve this draft notice for another period of amnesty as it is needed because of the limitations placed on the capacity of the first period due to the COVID-19 pandemic and declaration of a state of disaster. She stated that the further period of amnesty that is recommended will operate from 1 August 2020 to 31 January 2021, if approved. This date was changed from the first draft that indicated the amnesty will be operational from 1 June 2020 to 31 November 2020. This is a procedural issue, as the Minister is required to inform the Chairperson of the NCOP of the re-tabling of the notice. The notice has not changed substantially, except for a change in the period of operation for the further firearm amnesty to be approved. The Committee will proceed to hear the briefing by the SAPS relating to the progress of the firearm amnesty, but any decisions will be deferred until the Minister has complied with the procedural requirement outlined.

Mr G Michalakis (DA, Free State) enquired whether it would be proper for the Committee to be considering and discussing the notice that has not been placed before the Members. It is paramount that the correct notice (as amended) must be tabled and placed before the Committee before discussion can commence.

The Chairperson responded that there will be no decision taken by the Committee. Members will merely be receiving a briefing on the matter, but the request for support of the further firearm amnesty will not be considered until the Minister has complied with the procedural requirement.

Mr Michalakis expressed his concern that the Members will be engaging with a notice that has not yet been tabled or referred to the Committee. He noted that he accepts the Chairperson’s guidance in this regard.

The Chairperson noted that there has been no substantive change to the notice except for the change in date. The current notice as before the Committee has not been withdrawn yet, thus there is nothing to stop Members in engaging with the notice as it is since it would not change substantively after the procedural requirements has been met. She requested the Deputy Minister to speak on the issue after the presentation.

SAPS Briefing on Firearms Amnesty Extension:

Mr Cassel Mathale, the Deputy Minister of Police, commenced the presentation by stating that the initial period of firearm amnesty previously approved made a significant contribution to the reduction of unwanted firearms in circulation. The SAPS appreciated that the Committee is willing to hear the briefing despite the administrative procedural flaw regarding the tabling of the amended notice. He stated that the COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on the effectiveness of the first period of firearm amnesty as it placed strict regulations on the movement of people. It is because of these unplanned circumstances, that the SAPS is recommending the second period of Firearm Amnesty.

Gen Khehla John Sitole, National Commissioner of the SAPS, thanked the Committee for allowing SAPS to present the briefing.  

Feedback on the 2019/20 period of Firearm Amnesty:

Maj Gen. M Mamotheti, Acting Divisional Commissioner of Visible Policing, SAPS, stated that Parliament approved an initial period of firearm amnesty on 21 November 2019 for a period of six months from 1 December 2019 to 31 May 2020. The amnesty was premised on the following objectives: to reduce the number of illegally possessed firearms in circulation, to provide firearm owners with the opportunity to hand in unwanted firearms, to prevent crime and violence and to promote safety, to address the fundamental causes of crime to protect our communities, and to ensure that the people living in South Africa feel and have no fear of crime.

She stated that during the initial period, 27 336 firearms were surrendered (24 442 under amnesty, 2 894 voluntarily, and 795 were estate firearms). In addition, 798 firearm components together with 212 476 ammunition units (175 302 under amnesty, and 37 174 voluntarily) were surrendered to the SAPS. During the period of firearm amnesty from December 2019 to May 2020, there was a significant spike between April and May in the number of firearms surrendered. In April 2019, only 385 firearms were surrendered due to the national lockdown declared by President Ramaphosa at the end of March 2020. In May 2020, 11 030 firearms were surrendered to the SAPS. Most firearms and ammunition that were surrendered were in Gauteng and the Western Cape, which are the same areas that are hotspots for firearm-related crimes. 6 891 cartridge cases were received at the Forensic Science Laboratory for testing of amnesty firearms under the Integrated Ballistic Information System (IBIS). 10 704 firearm applications were received, but interviews and competency tests need to be finalised.

In the firearm amnesty period of 2005 (six months), 33 823 illegal firearms were surrendered under amnesty and 46 631 legal firearms were voluntarily surrendered. In the firearm amnesty period of 2010 (three months), 11 887 illegal firearms were surrendered under amnesty and 30 442 legal firearms were voluntarily surrendered. The SAPS reported that in the firearm amnesty period of 2019/20 (six months), 24 442 illegal firearms were surrendered under amnesty and 2 894 legal firearms were voluntarily surrendered. The baseline of expectations was based on the 2005 period of similar duration and the significant reduction in firearms surrendered over the same period shows the significant impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and limitations on the movement of people. The amnesty period showed a decrease in crime statistics, but the SAPS is cognisant that there are many factors at play in this reduction.

The objectives of the amnesty period were partially achieved, but there is still much to be done. While the crime level shows a decline, the crimes reported with firearms remain unacceptable. The number of illegal firearms in circulation is still significantly high. Even though people came forward to surrender their illegal or unwanted firearms, there are still many requests for the public to allow them more opportunity for the surrendering of firearms. The lockdown’s restrictions on the movement of people was raised as one of the reasons why many could not participate in the previous amnesty period. A firearm remains an instrument of choice in the commission of serious and violent crimes which has a psychological effect. Environmental design and easy access to firearms provides opportunities for its use in the commission of crime. Serious and violent crimes were slightly reduced, but hotspots areas remain in Gauteng, KwaZulu-Natal and the Western Cape provinces which are riddled with gangs, political killings, and taxi violence. According to the Victims’ Survey done in 2018/19 by Statistics South Africa (StatsSA), there were 260 000 reported home robberies and the most common weapons used in home robbery were guns.

Rational for another period of Firearm amnesty in 2020/21:

The objectives of the initial period of Firearm amnesty were partially achieved, and together with numerous public requests, it prompted the consideration of another period of firearm amnesty. SAPS recommended that another firearm amnesty be declared for a period of six months from 1 August 2020 to 31 January 2021 under section 139(2)(c) of the FCA with the conditions as per the draft notice signed by the Minister of Police. Preparations for the recent period of firearm amnesty have created awareness amongst members of the public and the momentum to participate has gained traction.

The declaration of another period of firearm amnesty will afford communities another opportunity to surrender illegal and unwanted firearms or ammunition to curb the proliferation of illegal firearms in circulation. The SAPS argued that an extension on the firearm amnesty, if declared and approved, will be in the interest of the public since many have shown wiliness to participate.

The Deputy Minister thanked the delegation from the SAPS and expressed his gratitude for the Committee’s consideration of the proposed additional period of firearm amnesty.

Discussion:
Mr Michalakis thanked the Deputy Minister and the delegation from the SAPS for the presentation. The notice that was referred to the Committee (with the dates of 1 June 2020 to 31 November 2020) proposed a period of amnesty that would have commenced two days before this meeting. The dates of the proposed amnesty period had to be amended and pushed to a later date, similarly to what happened before the approval of the initial period of firearm amnesty. Why is there always such an administrative hurry to get the notices to Parliament to such an extent that the amnesty dates precede the approval of Parliament? Regarding the amnesty request itself, it must be noted that the case of Gun Owners of South Africa (GOSA) v National Commissioner of Police and Another (46684/2018) [2018] ZAGPPHC 797 (27 July 2018) that was heard by the Pretoria High Court of Gauteng is currently before the Supreme Court of Appeal. Will it not be wise to wait for judgment in this court case as it will have a significant impact on the need for amnesty? Why is there a need for another firearm amnesty if there was previously indicated that the recently concluded amnesty was successful? He believed that the 2019/20 period of firearm amnesty was a failure, because compared to the 2005 firearm amnesty, SAPS did not even manage to get 6% of the voluntarily firearms that were surrendered in 2005. The restriction of movement cannot be used as an excuse, because May had a highest amount of people surrendering firearms in the middle of lockdown. Research shows that the police are the least trusted entity in the country. What will the SAPS and the Ministry of Police do differently to ensure the success of the additional period of firearm amnesty, if it gets approved? The FCA does not make provision for the extension of an amnesty period, which is why the SAPS must lodge a new request to get another period approved. Why did SAPS think the legislature did not provide for an extension of periods of amnesty and how does it factor into the decision for an additional period of firearm amnesty?

Ms M Mmola (ANC, Mpumalanga) sought clarity on the 17 000 firearms that Maj Gen Mamotheti mentioned, which conflicts with the 11 000 listed in the SAPS’ presentation. Were there any firearms stolen out of SAPS stations since the initial period of firearm amnesty? What are the challenges faced in the amnesty period because of the COVID-19 pandemic? Regarding the IBIS testing of ammunition cartridges, SAPS is requested to provide an indication of how many cartridges tested positive for use in reported crimes. The Committee will wait for the amended notice of submission for approval of the additional period of firearm amnesty, before considering it for approval.

Mr T Dodovu (ANC, North West) welcomed the presentation from the Deputy Minister and the SAPS delegation. He commended the presentation for being clear and attentive to the issue at hand. The issue of illegal firearms must be considered, and people must be encouraged to surrender their firearms during the amnesty period. He was not convinced that the SAPS communicated sufficiently with the public to raise awareness of the availability of the firearm amnesty. Communities must be reached through effective mass media and other institutions must be engaged to promote awareness of the firearm amnesty. What are the SAPS doing to hold those who do not surrender their illegal firearms accountable? He suggested that as the SAPS moves forward in combatting crime, the current national situation must be used to its advantage and to pay special attention to the possession of illegal firearms.

Mr S Zandamela (EFF, Mpumalanga) noted the decline in the surrendering of illegal firearms. Can the SAPS provide feedback on why this is the case and whether the period of amnesty is effective enough? Is the additional period of amnesty as requested by the Minister of Police and the SAPS in line with the spirit in which the FCA was drafted and passed?

Mr E Mthethwa (ANC, KwaZulu-Natal) enquired whether any of the illegal firearms that were surrendered can be tied to involvement with serious crimes or are the illegal firearms related to people who had valid licences that has since expired. What plan does the SAPS have to align everyone under one regulation regarding the validity of firearm licences? He stated that it is proper that the additional period of amnesty be considered before the Committee as the amended notice of submission for approval only encompasses a change of date, and not any substantive changes. Doing so will prevent any unnecessary delays.

Mr K Motsamai (EFF, KwaZulu-Natal) emphasised the point made by Mr Dodovu and asked what the SAPS was doing to hold those who do not surrender their illegal firearms accountable.

Ms Mmola referred to slide 17 of the SAPS’ presentation regarding the exemption of the police stations from receiving firearms. What criteria were used to select those police stations?

The Deputy Minister responded to the administrative question by stating that the timeframes between the discussions and submissions surrounding the approval of the previous firearm amnesty were limited and apologised for the procedural flaw. He stated SAPS must use all methods available to ensure that illegal firearms are out of circulation, requiring an additional period of amnesty to be declared to encourage the further surrendering of illegal firearms. He noted the concerns of Mr Dodovu and emphasised the SAPS’ commitment to the importance of ensuring the public is aware of the firearm amnesty period to encourage the surrendering of illegal and unwanted firearms.

Gen Sitole addressed the question of awareness campaigns and what the SAPS will do differently in the additional period of firearm amnesty to increase its success and effectiveness. During the lockdown, community policing forums were suspended. SAPS convened an online meeting for these forums, where the online community policing strategy was introduced to intensify their efforts using online forums and social media. SAPS will use the National Crime Combatting Strategy to coordinate operations in identified areas to search for illegal firearms as advised by intelligence agencies. The firearm amnesty is only one of many interventions used by the SAPS to combat crime. The IBIS testing programme identified eight positive cases which are then referred for investigations. SAPS use physical security assessment criteria to identify the police stations exempted from accepting firearms, which is conducted at every police station and their ability to safeguard the surrendered firearms and ammunition is determined.

Lt Gen S Masemole, the Deputy National Commissioner of Policing, SAPS, stated that there were no firearms stolen from a police station during the recent firearm amnesty period, but there have been such cases in previous amnesty periods. He stated that the declaration of another period of firearm amnesty will afford communities another opportunity to surrender illegal and unwanted firearms or ammunition to curb the proliferation of illegal firearms in circulation.

Lt Gen (Adv) A Khan, Divisional Commissioner of Legal and Policy Services, SAPS, referred to the court cases regarding firearms in the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court of Appeal. She submitted that the amnesty provided for under law and under the power of the Minister are two separate matters and that the Minister is acting within his powers. When the judgements of the court cases are received, the Minister and the Deputy Minister will then adopt a strategy to ensure that it is given effect to. Members are correct that the FCA does not make provision for the extension of an amnesty period, which is why the SAPS must lodge a new request to get another period approved. However, provision is made in the legislation to request such new periods of amnesty. SAPS is lodging a new application for a period of amnesty.

Mr Mthethwa stated that not all the questions were answered by the delegation from the SAPS and the Deputy Minister. Police stations are understaffed and not equipped with the required technology or resources to effectively execute the firearm amnesty period. What will SAPS do to improve its efficiency to avoid people having to wait in queues and experience extensive delays before receiving assistance?

Mr Michalakis restated his concern that SAPS did not even manage to get 6% of the voluntarily firearms that were surrendered in 2005. Research shows that the police are the least trusted entity in the country. What will SAPS and the Ministry of Police do differently to ensure the success of the additional period of Firearm amnesty, if it gets approved? He stated that the low statistics occurring in the last period of firearm amnesty is because of a lack of a trust relationship between SAPS and the public, which needs to be repaired. The restriction of movement cannot be used as an excuse for the low statistics, because May had a highest amount of people surrendering firearms in the middle of lockdown. The Committee is aware that the FCA does not make provision for the extension of an amnesty period. The question to the delegation was: Why do you think the legislature did not provide for an extension of periods of amnesty and how does it factor into your decision for an additional period of firearm amnesty? SAPS and the Deputy Minister must respect the intention of the legislature in not allowing for an extension of an amnesty period.

Mr Motsamai spoke in another language which was not translated.

The Deputy Minister stated the period of firearm amnesty that is sought from the Committee is only one of many interventions used by SAPS to combat crime. SAPS has programmes in place to deal with the various aspect of combatting crime and has physically visited the hostels in KwaZulu-Natal where several illegal firearms were confiscated. SAPS will intensify its efforts in ensuring that illegal firearms are out of circulation. He stated that if the FCA does not provide for the extension of an amnesty period, and the legislation requires an application for a new period of amnesty for the reason to enable SAPS to focus the new periods of firearm amnesty to address the shortfalls of the previous period of amnesty. There are many factors that contributed to the decreased success of the 2019/20 period of firearm amnesty. The Committee must regard the restrictions of the lockdown as one of these factors, albeit not the only one. He stated that the reflection that the police are the least trusted entity in South Africa is not necessarily true. The firearm amnesty period and its past successes shows the collaboration between the public and SAPS, and the sharing of information from the public to aid SAPS in fulfilling its mandate. He requested the names of the police stations that Mr Mthethwa referred to as understaffed and lacking resources so that SAPS may address the matter.

Gen Sitole stated that SAPS has an unconventional policing approach in the COVID-19 pandemic which is the most effective approach in facilitating takedowns to confiscate illegal firearms. Regarding the use of technology by SAPS, SAPS is employing the online community policing forums and other measures to combat crime to transform the organisation technologically and digitally.

The Chairperson stated that the names of the police stations that Mr Mthethwa spoke about will be compiled in a list and will be sent to the office of the Deputy Minister and the National Commissioner of the SAPS.

Ms C Visser (DA, North West) enquired whether the period of validity of licences can be extended to allow SAPS to deal with the backlog in the processing of firearm applications.

Lt Gen Masemole stated that SAPS does not have the discretion to extend the period of validity of licenses as it is governed by section 27 of the FCA.

The Chairperson deferred the adoption of the minutes of the Committee’s previous meetings to the next gathering of the Committee and the meeting was adjourned.