Police deal with watchdog will protect violent cops

accreditation
0:00
play article
Subscribers can listen to this article
Police arrest a protester at the Siqalo informal settlement near Mitchells Plain, Cape Town.
Police arrest a protester at the Siqalo informal settlement near Mitchells Plain, Cape Town.
Ashraf Hendricks, GroundUp

Police commanders will be empowered to overrule watchdog findings against their colleagues when a new agreement between the South African Police Service (SAPS) and the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID) takes effect.

The draft agreement was attached as an annexure in Police Minister Bheki Cele's response to Parliamentary questions last month.

A recent presentation to Parliament showed that the veto powers contained in this agreement are already being used by the police on a large scale across the country, GroundUp reported.

IPID officials have in the past complained that the police ride roughshod over many of their findings and disciplinary recommendations against officers implicated in such crimes as torture, murder, rape and corruption.

In the most extreme instances, police management refuses even to initiate disciplinary steps. This is in spite of the law saying that the police must do so.

A recent joint SAPS and IPID presentation to Parliament's Portfolio Committee on Policing revealed that the police had refused to take disciplinary steps in 229 cases, or more than half of the 550 IPID cases "finalised" in 2020/21. This is the highest such figure on record. In all these 229 cases, IPID investigators concluded that police officers had a case to answer. They were overruled by SAPS management.


In more than half the IPID recommendations that SAPS finalised in 2020/21, police ruled that watchdog findings against officers did not constitute a prima facie case and decided not to take any disciplinary action. (Image: Viewfinder)


The police's departmental systems have few checks and balances against their commanders overruling IPID in order to protect colleagues.

"If I'm the commander and my member that I want, that I'm buddy-buddy with, has done something, I'm not going to take steps against him. I'm going to do everything to stop steps from being taken," said an IPID official, who was quoted on condition of anonymity in Viewfinder's prior exposé on SAPS consequence management.

A new Viewfinder data analysis has indicated that police decisions to override findings against officers are final. Viewfinder looked at an IPID case data sample of 202 cases where SAPS refused to act on IPID's recommendations against officers.

In at least 32 of those cases, SAPS' refusal was at odds with both IPID and the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA). The NPA placed those cases on court rolls across the country, despite it having a much higher burden of proof to secure a conviction in court, compared to SAPS in disciplinary hearings.

These 32 cases included complaints of severe assaults or shootings by police which left people badly injured.

In one case, a Mbombela man complained that a sergeant punched him continuously, breaking his teeth. In another case, a man from Mahwelereng, Limpopo accused officers of using a plastic bag to suffocate him and pepper spraying him during an interrogation.

In one case, police reportedly shot and killed a fleeing suspect in Tembisa, Gauteng. In another case, police allegedly shot and killed a man after he was pulled over during a police stop on the road between Daveyton and Brentwood, Gauteng. The man had been driving along with his wife, children and friends, according to IPID's complaint description. In another case, from Welkom in the Free State, a police officer was accused of killing his wife and trying to cover it up.

Viewfinder has previously exposed a series of loopholes that senior police officers can use to undo IPID findings during police disciplinary proceedings. But, the above cases and the new "terms of reference" agreement between SAPS and IPID point to a different scenario. In these cases, police commanders can overrule IPID findings without even starting a disciplinary process.

Viewfinder queried SAPS and IPID management about the draft Terms of Reference for Disciplinary Hearing Committees and their past relationship with regard to implementing IPID disciplinary recommendations.

IPID spokesperson Grace Langa said that the directorate did not necessarily agree with SAPS' decisions that its recommendations often did not constitute a prima facie case against police officers.

"Since IPID has no power to implement its recommendation, but rely on SAPS to do so, only SAPS [will] be able to give reasons for not implementing the recommendations," she said.

SAPS spokesperson Brigadier Mathapelo Peters said that "questionable outcomes" of disciplinary cases could be escalated to SAPS' provincial or national head offices. She said that SAPS did not "wish not to be drawn into accounting to the media on departmental issues" and declined to respond to questions related to the Terms of Reference, because they were yet to be concluded.

In response to questions, Parliament's police portfolio committee chairperson Tina Joemat-Pettersson said she agreed with Viewfinder's findings.

"The committee has not had a chance to engage with the terms of reference. It is our view that agreements that undermine the spirit and intention of different pieces of legislation and which do not have legal standing will not be supported," she said.

"We will never agree that the findings of the IPID can be overruled … This is something we will be addressing in the SAPS Amendment Bill as well as the IPID Amendment Bill."

This article forms part of an ongoing investigation of police brutality and non-accountability in South Africa. It was funded, in part, by the Henry Nxumalo Fund for Investigative Reporting. It has been produced for GroundUp by Viewfinder.

Published originally on GroundUp.

Never miss a story. Choose from our range of newsletters to get the news you want delivered straight to your inbox.

We live in a world where facts and fiction get blurred
In times of uncertainty you need journalism you can trust. For 14 free days, you can have access to a world of in-depth analyses, investigative journalism, top opinions and a range of features. Journalism strengthens democracy. Invest in the future today. Thereafter you will be billed R75 per month. You can cancel anytime and if you cancel within 14 days you won't be billed. 
Subscribe to News24
Voting Booth
What are your thoughts on the possibility of having permanent Stage 2 or 3 load shedding?
Please select an option Oops! Something went wrong, please try again later.
Results
I'll take that over constant schedule changes
13% - 690 votes
Why are we normalising Eskom’s mess?
72% - 3758 votes
I've already found alternative ways of powering my home/business
15% - 804 votes
Vote
Rand - Dollar
17.20
+0.0%
Rand - Pound
21.32
+0.2%
Rand - Euro
18.70
+0.1%
Rand - Aus dollar
12.20
+0.3%
Rand - Yen
0.13
+0.0%
Platinum
1,018.15
+0.6%
Palladium
1,645.80
+1.7%
Gold
1,931.27
+0.1%
Silver
23.69
+0.4%
Brent Crude
86.66
-0.9%
Top 40
74,766
0.0%
All Share
80,791
0.0%
Resource 10
77,871
0.0%
Industrial 25
103,872
0.0%
Financial 15
16,281
0.0%
All JSE data delayed by at least 15 minutes Iress logo
Editorial feedback and complaints

Contact the public editor with feedback for our journalists, complaints, queries or suggestions about articles on News24.

LEARN MORE