Clarity given on private security industry’s proposed ‘firearms ban’

The Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority (Psira) has clarified its stance on proposed industry regulations.   

Minister of Police Senzo Mchunu gazetted a draft amendment to the Private Security Industry Regulation Act last month, on 28 March.

Residents and interests close to the private security industry reacted heatedly to the draft regulations, with many claiming it neutered a vital community service.

Police numbers declining

Psira says that the private security industry in South Africa has become a R50 billion industry employing 600 000 registered officers.  

This excludes civilians, who, together with the private officers, plug the gap left by a police force that itself claims to be under-resourced and underfunded.

Police stated in 2022 that they have roughly 176 000 personnel, including detectives, while the Institute of Security Studies stated that number would drop to roughly 162 000 due to officers leaving the force.   

The number of private personal greatly surpasses that of police, with Psira adding that it was a strong contributor to entry level employment across the country.  

The entity stated on Friday that it is committed to ensuring that the draft amendment would not hamper private security’s ability to protect citizens.

It claimed that the proposed regulations were aimed at strengthening compliance and oversight based on an industry needs analysis.

Amendment ‘vague and impractical’

Reactions in the wake of the police minister’s gazette ranged from beliefs that it would restrict gun ownership to claims it would leave South Africans at the mercy of criminals.

Chairperson of the portfolio committee on police, Ian Cameron, was quick to state his opposition to the amendments, saying that they were vague and impractical.

Most of the agitation had been around the potential limitation of firearms used by private security, a fear that Psira says is unfounded.

“There is no ban on the use of firearms by private security personnel. The proposed amendments do not prohibit firearms outright, but introduce conditions under which specific calibres may be used — enhancing oversight, not limiting lawful operations,” Psira said on Friday.

“The proposed regulations do not restrict the quantity of ammunition issued to security personnel. On the contrary, the aim is to ensure personnel are adequately equipped, allowing for the reasonable use of ammunition in line with operational requirements,” the entity added.

Economy reliant on private security

Cameron earlier demanded the draft be withdrawn because it was out of touch with personnel’s experience in dangerous situations.

“The absence of a clear standard exposes security firms to arbitrary and inconsistent enforcement, further increasing legal uncertainty in an already over-regulated environment,” said Cameron.

Psira said that the amendments are necessary in order to bring South African in line with “international standards” and deal with rogue elements.

Firearm law attorney Martin Hood dismissed the terms outright, saying existing legislation provided for the adequate policing of rogue officers and that private security needs varied from country to country.

“There are no international standards. Legislation varies from country to country, so to talk about international standards is completely misleading,” Hood told The Citizen.

“Why must we comply with international standards when we have our own set of unique circumstances,” he added.

Hood explained that all sectors of society were reliant on private security, from small businesses and shopping malls to the mining sector, adding that the cash economy would become extremely vulnerable.

“The private security industry protects the economy. You take that protection away and there will be a contraction of the economy,” Hood said.

‘Exceptional circumstance’

Psira clarified that armed response and asset transit officers would still be permitted to use firearms but stopped short at other areas.

“The status quo is that generally all other security officers in such public places do not require the use of firearms except in exceptional circumstances,” Psira stated.

On the proposed mandatory psychological testing of officers, Psira said it was necessary to safeguard the mental health and emotional condition of private security personnel.

“It’s all about building public trust and strengthening compliance and control in the private security sector,” Psira concluded.

NOW READ: Gauteng Health slams ‘misleading’ reports on hospital security costs