The proposed amendments to the Private Security Industry Regulations will not disarm security officers but will require private security firms to justify why they need to issue their officers with particular types of weapons.
This was said by Manabela Chauke (pictured), the chief executive of the Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority (PRISA), during an interview with Newzroom Afrika on Tuesday.
PSIRA, which was established in terms of the Private Security Industry Regulation Act, regulates the industry and exercises control over security service providers. Its functions include registering security companies and individuals and enforcing compliance with legal standards.
Chauke was responding to claims that the proposed regulations will undermine the ability of private security firms to protect lives and property and could result in job losses and business closures.
Read: Proposed regulations ‘will severely hamper’ security firms’ ability to operate
He emphasised that no business would close, and no one would lose their job because of the regulations.
Chauke said the regulations are designed to combat “rogue elements” within the industry and “rogue behaviour”, such as bodyguards firing into the air at funerals.
He explained that PRISA does not issue or revoke firearm licences. This is done by the South African Police Service in terms of the Firearms Control Act. PRISA controls the possession, issuing, and use of firearms by security service providers (security firms and security officers).
It is incorrect to allege that the draft amendments prohibit the use of firearms or disarm security officers, Chauke said.
“There are some people who are saying we are prohibiting. Now that is an incorrect use of words because there’s no word in the regulations that seems to be prohibiting anything. There are people who are saying we are disarming. There is no such word to say that security officers are being disarmed.”
He said the measures in the regulations are conditional, not absolute. They require a security firm to conduct a risk assessment before issuing an officer with a particular type of firearm.
“Basically, what we’re saying is we’re categorising scenarios or instances where you may use these firearms.”
He provided an example of a business that provides security at a creche.
“If you work in a creche, for instance, you don’t need a rifle, but if you come to us and say in this creche we have children whose parents belong to a particular income class they have a high risk and they can be kidnapped and therefore we need to use this rifle because we of the view that people would come here would use the similar weapons, we would allow you. Why not? All we’re saying is motivate. First thing first, conduct a risk analysis before you use the firearm,” he said.
“We don’t plan to disarm anyone. We don’t plan to restrict any lawful use of these firearms. All we’re saying is that we need to know where are you going to use it, and for what purpose are you going to use it. Is there need for it, for that purpose, and have you done your risk assessment to justify the use.”
The Minister of Police, Senzo Mchunu, published the draft amendments on 28 March and gave the public until 25 April to comment.
Chauke said PRISA has lobbied Mchunu to extend the deadline, and it seemed that the minister was amenable to granting an extension, although this decision has yet to be made.
