Salient Features of the Private Security Industry Regulation Amendment Bill
The Private Security Industry Regulation Amendment Bill, which was recently approved by cabinet, will soon be open for public comment. Several key issues are up for discussion.
Sabelo Gumedze, Senior Researcher, Conflict Management and Peacebuilding Division, ISS Pretoria
According to the
latest figures, there are over 1,78 million private security officers
registered in South Africa. This poses a huge challenge to the police, since
cooperation with the private security companies (PSCs) is of great concern.
Equally, the exportation of security services beyond South Africa and foreign
ownership of South African PSCs has become an issue of debate over the last
number of years.
To address some
of these issues the South African Cabinet on 30 May this year approved the
Private Security Industry Regulation Amendment Bill 2012 for submission to
Parliament. The Bill aims to introduce significant changes to the manner in
which the private security industry is currently regulated, notably when it
comes to the recruitment, funding and accountability of private security
companies. The Bill resulted from a process in which gaps and weaknesses were
identified in the current legislation, the Private Security Industry Regulation
Act No. 56 of 2001. South Africans will
be called upon to comment on the Bill in the not so distant future. The main
questions to be asked is whether the Bill will be practically viable in
effectively regulating and controlling the South African private security
industry.
When the
Minister of Police, Mr. Nathi Mthethwa, introduced the Bill during his budget
vote speech on 9 May 2012, he stated that the increasing number of private
security guards in South Africa poses a need for greater cooperation between
the private security industry and the South African Police Service. This
statement illustrates the point that the South African private security
industry has become a force to be reckoned with.. According to the latest Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority (PSIRA) Annual Report, as on March 2011, the
number of security officers registered with PSIRA stood at 1 780 874. As part
of ensuring that the private security sector was effectively regulated, in 2011
the Ministry of Police also initiated a process to review the functioning of
PSIRA. The processes of amending the PSIRA Act and reviewing the functioning of
PSIRA are both welcomed.
The main
objectives of the review of the PSIRA Act was to address gaps that are caused by
the lack of effective regulation of the private security industry, in
particular the threat to national security posed by the participation of
foreign nationals in the security industry. National security is always
paramount in so far as the provision of security is concerned. To this end,
among other things, the Bill aims at regulating foreign ownership and
controlling of private security businesses in South Africa; regulating
operations of security firms outside the borders of the Republic; providing for
the role of PSIRA in promoting crime prevention partnerships with organs of state;
providing for accountability of the PSIRA Council; and providing for the
funding of the Regulatory Authority by the State.
In so far as the
regulation of foreign ownership and control is concerned, the Bill proposes
that registration will only be possible provided the percentage of ownership
and control exercised by South African citizens in respect of the security
business is in the majority, as prescribed. This proposition will affect those
security companies whose majority shareholders are non-South Africans. The Bill
further provides that the companies whose majority shareholders are non-South
Africans will be given a period of 20 years after the commencement of the Act
to adhere to this requirement.
Regarding the
regulating operations of security firms outside the borders of South Africa,
the Bill proposes that any person who, within the Republic, recruits, trains,
hires out, sends or deploys any other person to provide a security service
outside the country must firstly provide the PSIRA director on a monthly basis,
such information as may be prescribed regarding such recruitment, training,
hiring out, sending or deployment within prescribed time limits, and secondly,
comply with the provisions of the PSIRA Act (as will be amended). The Bill places
emphasis on the fact that the individual covered by the Bill may not engage in
any activity or render any assistance that is prohibited in terms of the Prohibition
of Mercenary Activities and Regulation of Certain Activities in Country of
Armed Conflict Act 27 of 2006 or the Regulation of Foreign Military Assistance
Act 15 of 1989.
One of the most
important aspects of the Bill is the provision for the role of the Regulatory
Authority in promoting crime prevention partnership with organs of State. However,
it is not clear how this partnership will be strengthened. Perhaps, the
Regulatory Authority will have to convene meetings with the private security
industry and the police to ensure that this partnership works. It will also be important
to involve Community Policing Forums, as they are also involved in crime
prevention initiatives. Other stakeholders such as civil society organisations
involved in crime prevention should also be invited to such meetings in order
to ensure that crime prevention partnerships are effective.
Relating to the
provision for accountability of the PSIRA Council, including the formulation of
regulations on the transportation of cash and other valuables, the Bill
proposes that the Council will be accountable to the Minister for Police for
the performance of its functions. To this end, the Council must supply the
Minister with relevant information and particulars, which may be required by
the latter in connection with the functions of the Authority. The Bill also
proposes that Council must submit quarterly reports to the Minister of the
Activities of the Regulatory Authority or on any matter required by the
Minister.
Currently, the PSIRA
is self-funded mainly through prescribed amounts in respect of applications for
registration; annual amounts payable to it by members of the industry; fines
imposed on account of improper conduct; and interest from investments. The Bill
proposed to change this model to one that will see the Regulatory Authority
funded by the State, over and above the self-funding model. The State funding
will be appropriated by Parliament.
As the South
African public waits for the tabling of the Bill before Parliament, the need to
think through what the Bill proposes cannot be overemphasised. No doubt, before
the Bill is passed into law, the need for South Africans to further engage in
debates on the issues proposed in the Bill would be paramount.
