Combating crime effectively and within the law – a response to Gauteng premier Panyaza Lesufi

In recent weeks Daily Maverick published a series of articles raising questions about the appointment and training of Gauteng’s Crime Prevention Wardens, also known as the amaPanyaza. High levels of crime make it a highly emotive issue, and successful interventions to combat crime need cool heads and close public scrutiny.

However, last week in a right of reply requested by Gauteng premier Panyaza Lesufi, he attacks the bonafides of the articles’ authors, as well as of Daily Maverick for publishing them, claiming that “a quick review of the wardens’ coverage reveals that most of the accusations and claims made against them are overstated, political, contrived and speculative”. Among other things the premier accused us of “a manipulative, non-factual crusade to undermine the CPWs. Every crusade needs a devil, and they seem to have found one in the CPWs.”

Read more in Daily Maverick: Gauteng Crime Prevention Wardens: Premier slams reporting

Public discussion is good for accountability and the media must answer for its claims. Unfortunately though, although Lesufi’s response is full of sound, fury and insinuation, it doesn’t directly rebut any of the issues raised in the series of articles:

• The premier doesn’t refute or provide contrary evidence to the assertion that the GCPWs have been set up illegally because permission has not yet been granted by the minister of justice and correctional services, as is required in terms of s 334 of the Criminal Procedure Act;


• Instead the premier says: “When the training programme is complete, the Crime Prevention Wardens will be appointed in terms of the Public Service Act, 1994 (Proclamation No. 103 of 1994), and designated as Peace Officers in terms of section 334 of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1977 (Act No. 51 of 1994)” – effectively admitting that while the GCPWs are already budgeted for and deployed to communities, they have not yet been officially appointed. Despite admitting this the premier says: “Scores of suspects have been arrested by the CPWs jointly with other law enforcement agencies.” With what legal powers, we ask again?;


• The premier says nothing about the allegation of violence against an innocent member of the public. He expresses no sympathy and makes no commitment to a speedy investigation. Instead, the premier refers to the severe injuries we have reported as “magnified mistakes” which he passes off with the comment: “Not to say that they are flawless, no one is – anything involving humans is imperfect”;


• The premier doesn’t address how policing experts have voiced concerns about three months of training being inadequate. Or how policing experts have voiced concerns that some of the roles of CPWs do not make sense;


• The premier doesn’t contradict our assertion that independent oversight is inadequate. Instead he says that “any abuse of authority is to be reported to the Public Service Commission by the public”. How and to who? He adds: “The Risk Management Directorate [in the Department of Community Safety], which oversees the investigation of allegations of fraud and corruption against the department’s law enforcement personnel, investigates complaints against the wardens internally.” The young man who was unlawfully beaten almost to death by GCPWs has been told none of this. After one visit by the department and Ipid he has heard nothing more;


• The premier doesn’t deny the email correspondence we published with the chief finance officer of the Department of Community Safety warning that “the department has exposed itself to serious risks” and recommending that “accredited instructors” be procured. Neither does he address the response of another senior official that the retired DCS officials he had enlisted to provide the training were “here with a very clear conscience of contributing to the ruling party targeting the 2024 elections, as all of them are active members of the ruling party”;


• The premier does not supply evidence of the certification of the training. Instead he repeats the vague statement that the training “has received approval from the relevant Education and Training Quality Assurance Body via the national Department of Transport”, without saying which SETA, or why the national Department of Transport would be responsible for accrediting a safety and security programme;


• The premier refers to the GCPWs forming part of Gauteng’s “comprehensive policing strategy against crime that was launched in the last State of the Province Address”, while not pointing out that the Gauteng Safety Strategy 2015-2020 is nearly four years past its sell-by date; and


• The premier refers to his pronouncements on targeting crime in his State of the Province Address in February 2023 (read it here). But this does not amount to either a strategy or a policy. Indeed, in his initial prolix response to our questions (which we published in full) Sizwe Pamla, the premier’s spokesperson, admitted as much, saying that the province is “looking to develop a Community Safety Bill and Community Safety Policy encompassing CPW, Traffic, PS, Patrollers, Brigades, GBVF etc”.