At their core the current inquiries into political interference and corruption in the criminal justice system stem from the SA Police Service (SAPS) and politicians’ sustained refusal to implement the reforms that are required for responsive, accountable and democratic policing to take root in SA.
It’s not as if it’s not known what is needed. From the 1995 Policing white Paper to the 2008 Matthews commission on intelligence, the 2012 National progress Plan (NDP) and the marikana commission’s expert panel’s report – essentially a two-year, widely consulted policing review – all outlined the required conversion to achieve a publicly trusted and professional SAPS.
Public and institutional accountability, alongside demilitarisation, runs like a golden thread through all of thes policy, reform and transformation proposals. Professionalism and depoliticising the SAPS emerge as foundational.
Instead, details of police politicking, corruption and malicious compliance have unfolded before the Madlanga commission and in parliamentary proceedings. The time frame is relatively recent – KwaZulu-Natal police commissioner Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi framed his claims around the 2024 New Year’s Eve decision to disband the political killings task team – and can’t be blamed on state capture.
Political meddling and corruption in the criminal justice system date back to the Thabo Mbeki presidency, from national police commissioner Jackie Selebi (convicted drug trafficker Glenn Agliotti testified against him about their relationship) to spy boss Billy Masetlha, on whose watch the fake email hoax played into ANC politicking.“`html
South Africa’s Security State: A Systemic Crisis of Accountability
South Africa’s security apparatus is facing a systemic crisis of accountability. A complex web of overlapping structures and a lack of clear legal frameworks are eroding oversight and creating an habitat ripe for abuse. This isn’t simply a matter of isolated incidents; it’s a fundamental flaw in how the contry approaches safety and security.
Co-ordinating structures like the legislated national intelligence co-ordinating commitee (Nicoc),the national security council,and Natjoints (national joint operational and intelligence structure – which lacks formal legal standing) bring together police,intelligence,and defense forces. This further complicates security decision-making processes.
this structural opacity in governance leads to a decline in both public and institutional accountability. Invoke the phrase “national security” – a term that remains poorly defined and often clashes with South Africa’s constitutional values of accountability and transparency – and secrecy quickly overrides meaningful oversight. This undermines the constitutional right to safety and security for all South Africans.
The problems aren’t due to a lack of recommendations. Had there been sufficient political will, coupled with strategic planning and dedicated resource allocation, concrete reforms to professionalize the police service could have been implemented long ago.
Consider the national policing board, outlined in the 2012 National Development Plan (NDP). It was intended to establish “standards for recruiting, selecting, appointing and promoting police officials and police officers” and to enforce ethical conduct.The 2018 expert panel report expanded on this concept, detailing how the national policing board would function.
Key Takeaways
- Lack of Accountability: overlapping security structures and vague legal frameworks hinder oversight.
- “national Security” as a Shield: the invocation of “national security” frequently enough prioritizes secrecy over transparency.
- Missed Opportunities for Reform: Concrete proposals for police reform, like the national policing board, have been stalled due to a lack of political will.