I don’t think it is unreasonable to be appalled and outraged by the practice – the SAPS abuses their powers, and so doing abuse the very public they serve, and when said public takes them to court to seek justice for the criminal mistreatment they suffer at the hands of the police, the accused makes use of the victim’s tax money in order to defend their criminality.
The last few weeks have been a tumultuous time for the firearm ownership debate. The Constitutional Court ruling back in June succeeded in solving absolutely nothing. The issue was firmly kicked back to government and civil society with the instructions “you fix this”. Thankfully the ConCourt made it clear that nobody should be arrested for having an expired firearm licence – the prohibition of so-called “strict liability”.
The dogs who caught the bus
Judging by the initial reactions of the South African Police Service, they were like the dog who finally caught the bus – they had no idea what to do with it. If ever a party in a legal dispute was completely unprepared for victory, it was the SAPS.
On 14 June the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee (PPC) on Policing discussed the repercussions of the ConCourt ruling with the top brass of the SAPS. The police were adamant that those with expired licences must surrender their weapons. When asked how the SAPS intended to cope with seizing over 440 000 firearms and more than 60 million rounds of ammunition, there were many sideways glances but few coherent answers. The National Commissioner admitted that the SAPS were still in the process of planning the endeavor. And that said plan would be submitted to Parliament within the next 3 to 6 months.
In any event, as far as the police were concerned, the seizure of firearms from civilians was a done deal.
The woeful SAPS track record of safeguarding guns
One of the major concerns raised by committee members Zakhele Mbhele (DA), Dianne Kohler Barnard (DA), Pieter Groenewald (FF+), and committee chairman Francois Beukman (ANC) was the problem of firearms being stolen from SAPS custody. The Colonel Chris Prinsloo scandal’s full repercussions are yet to be discovered, and numerous high profile cases of theft and corruption involving the transfer of SAPS firearms to criminals occurred in 2017 and this year.
The inability of the police to safeguard firearms under their control is obviously a serious problem. It is fortunately apparent that politicians and lawmakers are very much aware of this.
The stakeholder engagement process
The PPC made it clear that the SAPS must engage with the relevant stakeholders going forward. In other words, they couldn’t go this solo and simply do what they want. Due process, and all the transparency that goes with it, needed to be adhered to.
After the PPC sitting Gun Owners of SA initiated contact with SAPS Legal Services to attempt salvaging the situation. I must add that the police requested GOSA to make contact, and not the other way around. The plan was to find a workable solution which avoided depriving citizens of their lawful property. The supposed stakeholder engagement process in action.
Unfortunately it was not to be. In the grand tradition of many an engagement between the firearm owning community and the SAPS, it all derailed within weeks.
While GOSA privately dealt with the SAPS in good faith, the police’s public conduct was markedly the opposite. National and provincial spokespeople made all manner of aggressive and threatening demands in the daily news media. Those with expired licences must immediately surrender their weapons, or face imminent arrest and confiscation. Confusing and contradicting directives were issued by separate provincial SAPS offices. Nobody, even SAPS officers on the ground, knew what to do.
Trust betrayed – again
This was pure intimidation. A remarkably similar chain of events as what happened in 2009. But as we shall see, the similarities do not end there.
When GOSA’s legal team inquired from the police why they insist on issuing such aggressive communications to the public whilst the stakeholder engagement process was still very much ongoing, they received no answer. The SAPS had stopped talking to them. It became obvious that the police had no intention of solving the problem at all, and were instead forcing a crisis. The situation had become intolerable.
It was then decided that urgent legal action is required. The GOSA legal team immediately began compiling their case. It was of utmost importance that the SAPS be interdicted from arresting people with expired licences, and seizing their property. That would form the urgent part of the application. The main application would then challenged the concept of relicencing as a whole.
SAPS admissions not worth the paper they are written on
In their answering affidavit, the National Commissioner yielded on several important points. The first was their unequivocal acknowledgement that all of the so-called “Green Card” and ID book licences were valid. Regardless of whether or not the holder applied for a new licence. This alone would have solved nearly 75% of the total problem. Secondly, they conceded that nobody will be arrested or prosecuted for having an expired firearm licence. Thirdly, and most interestingly, they admitted that holders of expired firearm licences can supposedly renew said licences after expiry with “good cause shown”. This is an interesting admission, because it is common knowledge that the functionality on the SAPS IT system allowing for such a renewal was disabled in 2016.
This alteration (or sabotage) of the IT functionality was done unilaterally and by stealth. A parting gift to us from Jaco Bothma? Yet another sterling example of our guardians of law and order acting in bad faith. And against the public interest.
Of course none of these admissions are binding, despite them being under oath to the North Gauteng High Court.
The North Gauteng High Court Knock Out
Thus, on Friday 27 July GOSA met the SAPS in the North Gauteng High Court. The proceedings started shortly after 10:00 and carried on until well past 17:00. It was nail biting stuff.
The first hurdle cleared was the acceptance of GOSA’s locus standi. The next, and probably most significant, was the court’s acceptance of urgency. From there, and I hope the GOSA legal team forgives my utter presumptuousness, the ride seemed fairly downhill by comparison.
(Now, the next part I am recalling from memory and recorded communication. By the time of publication the full typed judgement will hopefully be available online, and attached at the bottom of this article. So please forgive any factual inaccuracies.)
Judge Prinsloo deemed the issue as a crisis of national security. He took judicial notice of the inherent corruption plaguing the SAPS, and basically concluded that it would be in the interest of public safety that firearms of which the licences have expired rather remain under lock and key with their owners. As opposed to them being surrendered to, or confiscated by, the police. A most damning indictment of the corrupt state of SAPS by the court. And one from which I doubt their reputation will ever recover.
Much more of great significance was said, but that will require a separate article. Judge Prinsloo finalised the proceedings and ordered two very important things:
• No person with an expired firearm licence may be arrested or prosecuted.
• The SAPS are interdicted from confiscating or demanding the surrender of firearms of which the licence has expired.
This order immediately brought relief to over 400 000 citizens. Relief they so desperately needed. It was a repeat performance of the landmark 2009 court order by the same judge. A court order that to this day prevents the unjustifiable criminalisation of all people still holding the old “green card” and ID book firearm licences.
But it was a hard-won victory for firearm owners, and nothing was a sure thing until the fat lady sang. Fortune favours the brave, and on that day the firearm owning community was brave indeed.
The SAPS would rather fight the public (with their money) than fight crime
What astounds me is how hard the SAPS are fighting this issue. Yes, a great many police officers and higher ups have applauded this outcome along with us. Yet I also hear disturbing reports of some officers and individuals within SAPS management who are thoroughly enraged by it. One story pertains to a Gauteng DFO saying “how dare these gun owners tell us what to do? Who do they think they are?” I also have it on good authority that a certain Colonel in Western Cape FLASH had his nose severely put out of joint by the order.
What the SAPS are doing, is to recklessly squander tax payer funding to stubbornly defend indefensible positions in court. Civil claims against the police have spiraled into billions of rands over the last few years. And Parliament has expressed grave concern about the police being ceaselessly sued by the public due to their flagrant and disgraceful abuses of power. Yet the organization seems incapable of learning its lessons, and insists on paying an absolute fortune for legal counsel to defend their bizarre, corrupt, and criminal activities in court.
When I forwarded concerns to the PPC regarding the SAPS’s wasteful and frankly irresponsible legal expenditure, I was assured that the matter will be investigated when MPs return from their recess.
I don’t think it is unreasonable to be appalled and outraged by the practice – the SAPS abuses their powers, and so doing abuse the very public they serve, and when said public takes them to court to seek justice for the criminal mistreatment they suffer at the hands of the police, the accused makes use of the victim’s tax money in order to defend their criminality.
This is beyond obscene and disgraceful. Jacques Pauw referred to the SAPS as the most corrupt organ of a corrupt state. It appears they are pulling out all the stops to prove him right.
The road forward – onwards and upwards
Wasteful and corrupt expenditure by the SAPS aside, the court order is a huge victory for South African gun owners. It has gained the attention of the PPC, who will be discussing it in Parliament on 16 August. It also presents our community with the opportunity to keep the forward momentum going. The police will certainly not just let it lie and accept this outcome. We must defend our win.
At the same time we cannot afford to become drunk on our own success, and rest on our laurels. It will be a long time before the main application is heard in court. In the meantime we must earnestly engage with Parliament and help them understand why the relicencing regime is a farce that succeeds only in wasting resources. And that all its advertised functions are more than adequately covered by numerous other sections of the Act.
If our community remains as steadfast and committed as we have shown to be, I have no doubt in my mind that we shall achieve our goals.
Per Aspera Ad Astra.
Written by Gideon Joubert
Gideon is owner and editor of Paratus
John Rance
•6 years ago
Well done GOSA, our grateful thanks. I trust that all our firearm, hunting and wildlife ranching associations are supporting you morally and financially in this endeavour. If not, please publicise who is not supporting your court actions financially, in order that we may put pressure on them to do so.
Peter Moss
•6 years ago
While I take pleasure in seeing a well deserved moral victory reading this write up gave me no hope for the future. The same myopic blind thinking exhibited for so long still pervades firearm organisations and the one that had the best and most to start with has been dragged down to almost the same level. I as a GOSA founder member am saddened to see the unenlightened thinking that would never have happened in the early days of the FCA. What was known is forgotten or more likely tossed by the wayside.
1) The SAPS have a history of COMPLETE deceit in all dealings with firearm owners. Expecting anything different is what firearm organisations do best.
2) Deceit is predictable as the SAPS are an arm of government, run by government, controlled by government. Government and the SAPS want those citizens guns and as the situation gets progressively worse in SA that need to remove citizens guns is only going to increase.
3) Only a fool thinks you can win in court as government holds all the cards and nobody has unlimited funds. It takes days, weeks or months but any law can be rewritten around any court judgement. Your victories must be more permanent requiring great effort to remove.
4) Government in every country has with gun control succeeded not because government is more powerful but because firearm organisations are to afraid to fight or think.
5) Lack of membership support for collaboration, appeasement, apathy and fear is what is expected for such cowardly behaviour. It is the death of firearm ownnership to do it. Organisations are run by elitists who think they can do everything, are infallible all knowing and that they know how to win this fight. That is not true at any level.
Not one has ever been able to articulate this master plan they claim to know of how to win. However make a suggestion and now they are experts proclaiming that cannot help. Why they have no idea. What it does is show FEAR that they have as they will fight any suggestion of opposition to firearm laws. What they will not do is lead, think, examine, plan and execute. In eighteen years they collectively have done absolutely nothing to organise plan or fight. They have during this time had only one objective and that was to fix the FCA and collaborate with the SAPS. They would rather squabble and fight with any suggestion that they do something useful. Instead they have conditioned firearm owners to accept the FCA. One organisation even publicly stated that the most precious thing firearm owners had was that licence.
This is a fatal mistake only the most irresponsible and uncaring could make. Even the ANC could have told them you never accept injustice and condition your members to accept injustice which is stupidity beyond belief. But firearm officials are not stupid so there is another explanation for their avoidance and desire not to oppose this law. Since they know what it is all it takes is planning and support from members to act and aid fighting anything government and the SAPS attempt to do.
I would like to suggest that the time to grow some backbone is now by building on success. First no firearm official has any mandate from any firearm owner to give away any rights to life or self-defence. The FCA is no doubt an abomination that must be objected to. The first official that says lets accept this or that should be removed instantly. “Lets ask/beg for this” is madness equally not done.
You start by saying what you know, gun control serves no useful purpose to the SAPS, wastes public money for no return in crime fighting. Why is this happening and this money not used for what is desperately needed to fight the most violent crime in the world. What do you suggest we do to remove this failed and horribly expensive waste. What is needed? This is your public face and you will use it exclusively. You will not glorify guns, you will not claim training makes you safe. You will not claim anything that does not relate to public safety. You will not try to promote any other aspect than public safety and the fact firearm ownership aids citizens resist crime giving them a chance to survive criminal efforts to rape, injure, hijack, rob and murder.
When you talk “negotiate” you are like GFSA you take what you can get and give nothing away. You have nothing anybody allows you to give and no permission to give anything up. Nor do you agree what has bee taken can be retained. You have no mandate for that either. Agree with nothing. Propose nothing. This is a SAPS problem they built it despite the best advice, let them sort it out. No firearm organisation official is there to fix SAPS problems unless it is to remove the law or sections of it.
What happens when this fails? And it will fail so you had better be prepared. Ask a labour union if they know the answer. You have to demonstrate and now show your members the people you claim to represent are serious about what they want. If you cannot do that then there is a failure to motivate and gain support and it is a lie you represent them.
Firearm organisations are going to need a complete rethink and all the help they can get because they have no idea or desire for that to happen. It’s not that they do no know, it because they have rejected it wiping all memory at the same time. Another huge hurdle that should have been overcome years ago. If only firearm organisation officials actually cared about their members and citizens safety enough to do some good for a change. If you claim to represent members and firearm owners then at least have the grace to do it.
gunservant85
•6 years ago
Peter, for months now you have been expressing utter disdain for any individual or organisation that actively fights gun control in its unworkable, farcical guise. Yet the only alternative you offer appears to be violent civil disobedience tantamount to extreme contempt for the legislative processes of the Republic of which we are citizens. There is not a single country in the entire world that does not possess some sort of firearm legislation. Even in nations that have the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Hence why citizens must be actively involved in the engagement of their elected lawmakers.
Your tirades against those who work selflessly to promote firearm rights within our society are so filled with vitriol and toxicity, that I am beginning to wonder if you yourself are not some sort of GFSA plant tasked with the purpose of sowing discontent, doubt, division and upheaval.
Riaan
•6 years ago
Seems to me the only viable option is to disband GOSA and all other organisations, all ex members pay this Moss guy a monthly fee, and he sorts everything out like, evidently, nobody else can. A new superhero is born on social media every minute. Gun owners can then sit back with a beer and watch how he fixes everything. What a relief.
Marcelle
•6 years ago
Good idea! 😀 Some people are professionals standing on the sidelines and criticise. We can all find fault, but to come forward with solutions really takes deep thinking with all the obstacles in mind. Obviously he doesn’t count amongst the latter.
Allen
•6 years ago
As full supporter of Gosa I will suggest as Ex Police Officer and abiding citizen of SA to help the Government to flash and sniff out all illegal firearms with our sniffer dogs instead of legal expired licence some of us we are prepared to help let the gosa establish that unit with SAPS and get into operations all over the country we there to help unlike to disarm us because I have failed to renew my licence .Come Government make use of us sitting with specialized skill to fight crime all over especially on border post want to help work together with other law enforcement agencies as the owner of the security company that is my main proposal to Gosa to negotiate further with this proposal as member to be therefore I will be presenting my wonderful organisation gosa unlike talking silly comments but no solution . Gosa as you have capacity to negotiate with Government will you please take this proposal forward to Gov negotiations as way forward from your member