Portfolio Committee Hammers SAPS, Police Minister

Special thanks to Ludwig Churr who made note of the questions during the PPC sitting yesterday.

A series of penetrating questions were asked by MPs during yesterday’s Parliamentary Portfolio Committee sitting in which the SAPS proposed firearm amnesty, which did not have the required approval of Parliament, was unceremoniously thrown out.

Apart from being a highly embarrassing oversight on the part of the senior police officials involved, it also demonstrated an unhealthy contempt for due process and the authority of Parliament.

MPs were clearly not impressed by the proposals, and representatives from the ANC, DA, and FF+ sitting on the committee fired off numerous inquiries at the Minister of Police and SAPS officials:

  1. Would a criminal really supply his name, address, and telephone and ID numbers on paper when they hand in the weapons they illegally possess and committed serious crimes with? Especially if the surrendered weapon will be subjected to ballistic testing. Isn’t this missing the entire point of the amnesty?
  1. Will the criminals who stole 30 firearms from the SAPS this week hand these same weapons in on 1 April 2017? It was a rhetorical question asked and answered by stating that the reason why the weapons were stolen from SAPS in the first place, was for criminal intentions.
  1. In reply to a direct question it was admitted that not one illegally owned firearm was handed in by a criminal during previous amnesties.
  1. In reply to a direct question it was admitted that not one of the weapons handed in was linked to a crime.
  1. It was agreed that the previous removal of weapons through amnesty did not reduce crime. In fact, crime noticeably increased after the conclusion of the previous amnesty.
  1. It was stated twice that it appears the government is hell-bent on removing only the firearms possessed by legal registered owners whose licenses have expired. If this is indeed the case, then the government must admit to this openly.
  1. The Minster of Police asked why people feel safe if they own a weapon. When asked in turn why he makes use of armed bodyguards, the Honourable Minster said that he will answer the question. Which the Honourable Minster never did during the remainder of the proceedings. I suppose that there is no answer seeing as even GFSA uses armed bodyguards for their own protection.

What is painfully obvious is that this entire proposal was poorly thought-through, rash, and harboured the hidden agenda of confiscating the firearms of expired licence holders through intimidation and threats of arrest before the court cases dealing with the matter can be concluded. It is heartening to see that the Parliament of the Republic has the integrity to protect the rights of the nation’s citizens from this type of abuse of authority.

Before any amnesty is proposed, the consequences of previous ones must be taken into account and the price paid by citizens for the bungling during and subsequent to the process must not be forgotten.

This is something that was clearly not done.


10 thoughts on “Portfolio Committee Hammers SAPS, Police Minister

  1. Awesome, thanks so much for the update and for being there

    Has the CFR solved a single crime? Has the auditor general audited its costs and benefits?


  2. Also, none of those rather pointed questions which show the complete illegitimacy of the amnesty were reported by the media. Nothing. Can Ludwig write a letter copied to all editors setting the record straight on the Q&A?


    • I did put two short comments on GOSA and my FB page. Busy working on a letter in reply to the lie (of GFSA et al). and will share it. Will take a few days. It takes far longer to write a short to the point letter. A lot to write about,

      And it was really …. really great to see so many friendly faces there. The solidarity gave the anti’s a clear message.


      • Times live article and News 24 articles where forwarded to WC MEC Dan Plato for comment corrections as follows:-

        Dear Jennifer Logan, Secretary to WC MEC Dan Plato.

        The article and email below to the Press Ombudsman refers to Times Live Quoting the Honorable WC MEC on the April 2017 Firearm Amnesty. The Amnesty that must still be approved, announced and placed in the gazette by Parliament.

        Please confirm appointment date, as soon as possible, to discuss matter with MEC.
        Alternatively, the MEC can confirm by return letter if the Times Live article is quoting correctly what the Honorable MEC Dan Plato said regarding the Firearm amnesty…., or not.

        Please note that I am cc Mr. Irvin Kinnes, the Police Portfolio Committee content advisor, to bring matter to the attention of the Honorable Chair of the Police Portfolio Committee.

        Your usual kind attention and reply will be appreciated.

        Yours faithfully

        L D Churr

        What News24 reported correctly

        and what Times live (Whose reporter left early) wrote.. but then she is using Dan Plato MEC of WC as her source.



  3. Thanks Gun Servant.
    I am a bit in the dark as to what the final ruling was. What is the current position for firearm owners with an expired licence. Can they noe renew the licence?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s