This article focuses on the increasing role of the private security industry in combating crime, with specific reference to South Africa. In this regard, both the current and potential roles are considered and problematic issues discussed. An overview of the main provisions of the Private Security Industry Regulation Act, 2001 is included. The main conclusion is that although private security provides an important service, it does not replace the need for effective public policing. The possibility of cooperation between private security and the police also requires further investigation.
Various factors have led to the phenomenal growth of the private security industry in South Africa. The increase in crime, as well as perceptions and realities regarding the efficient functioning of the South African Police Service (SAPS), and metro policing, are among the main factors in this regard. More recently, attention has been focused on improving the regulation of the private security industry, and increasingly appeals are made for closer co-operation between the SAPS and private security. It remains to be seen whether increased efficiency on the part of the SAPS or the introduction of metro policing in cities where this does not yet exist, will diminish the need for private security.
In this article, an overview of the private security sector in South Africa and the kinds of services rendered, is given; followed by selected official South African views on private security and current initiatives to regulate the industry. This is followed by an assessment of the current as well as potential role that private security could play in combating crime.
2. INDIVIDUAL SECURITY AND NATIONAL SECURITY
Increased emphasis on the concept of "human security", and at times even equating it to national security, has meant that crime has been recognised as one of the obvious threats to human security. However, it is often, from a human security and/or a national security point of view, not combated effectively.
The two basic components of human security are freedom from fear and freedom from want. Threats to human security are listed as being threats to the following areas (although they tend to overlap), namely economic security, food security, health security, environmental security, personal security, community security and political security. Each of these are seen to require certain conditions, such as a basic income, and physical and economic access to basic food. (1)
Part of the problem regarding an excessive focus on human security is its affordability to the state. Has the threat to individual security reached the stage where it has already, or may soon, become a threat to national security? To what extent does the state have a definite legal obligation to provide aspects of human security; and what is the distinction between the causes, potential causes or potential manifestations of threats to national security and the actual manifestations of these threats? These are often confused.
Threats to human security, such as poverty, could therefore exist without this necessarily manifesting (or even potentially manifesting) as a threat to national security. It has been argued that only if a certain condition or situation leads to violence, unacceptable conflict or state instability, or has the clear potential to do so (including existing indications to this effect), could it possibly be viewed as a national security threat. In this regard, threats to law and order are not necessarily threats to national security, nor is normal national or international competition. The intensity, extent and consequences of for instance violent crime, will determine in a given situation whether it is a threat to individual security and law and order, or also a threat to national security. It has of course also been said that a threat is a threat to national security when a government says it is. This is, however, insufficient, as governments often list priorities for the sake of political expediency, or under or overemphasise certain threats. Threats or potential threats from the same source, for example the environment, may pose a threat to individual security only, or to individual and national (and possibly also global) security.
In the Third World context specifically, it has been argued that threats to national security must ultimately have a political dimension. (21) Although the concept of "security software" is especially important in the Third World context, over-emphasis of this dimension could lead to utopian thinking, particularly when divorced from national security.
Despite the difficulty of finding a universally acceptable definition of human security and its link with national security, the Memorandum of Understanding on Security, Stability, Development and Cooperation in Africa (CSSDCA--July 2002) stipulates that by 2005, a framework for codifying the concept of human security into national laws as contained in the CSSDCA Solemn Declaration, should be established. (31)
As far as the latter is concerned, it is inter alia stated that: (4)
(b) The concept of security must embrace all aspects of society including economic, political and social and environmental dimensions of the individual, family, and community, local and national life. The security of a nation must be based on the security of the life of the individual citizens to live in peace and to satisfy basic needs while being able to participate fully in societal affairs and enjoying freedom and fundamental human rights.
The above does not specifically refer to the concept national security (although it refers to stability), and obviously takes a wide view of security with the emphasis on human security.
Definitions of "human security" (although the concept has obvious merits), have been criticised for often being too vague and wide, and that virtually any type of threat or even discomfort, could constitute a threat to human security It also does not help decision-makers in deciding on the allocation of scarce resources among competing goals if no hierarchy of security objectives is established. "After all, not everything can be a matter of national security with all of the urgency that this term implies". (5)
An over-emphasis of human security can also create false priorities and a false sense of hope, as well as false assumptions, as the alleviation of human insecurity does not necessarily mean greater peace and security. (6) Many "human security" issues are in fact service delivery issues, some at local level.
Human insecurity is often at least partially the result of bad governance or an emphasis on regime security instead of national security. Buzan also pertinently states that national and international security cannot be reduced to individual security. The pursuit of individual security may also lead to conflict with the state, and individual security may be affected both positively and negatively by the state. (7)
Although all threats to human security are not automatically threats to national security, crime for instance is often not sufficiently viewed as a threat to human security, or in some instances to both human and national security. In the case of South Africa, it could be argued that crime is a serious threat to both individual security and to national security. Recognising this as such is, however, only a first step, as an unacceptable gap often exists between policy and effective implementation.
It is therefore clear that while countering all threats to individual security lies beyond the capacity of the state, despite undertakings contained in Bills of Human Rights, certain basic state functions and responsibilities do exist. One of the prime functions in this regard is to provide an acceptable level of national and individual security. Whether due to a lack of resources on the part of the state; a lack of political will; inefficient service provision; increasing crime levels; or a need for added security, those that can afford it have increasingly been making use of private security, also in South Africa.
3. THE PRIVATE SECURITY INDUSTRY IN SOUTH AFRICA: EXTENT AND ROLE
Private security has been described as "those efforts by individuals and organisations to protect their assets from loss, harm or reduction in value, due to criminality." (8) In this regard, the protection of assets in the business, commerce and industry environment is the basic function of private security. These assets may include people, fixed and immovable property, business rights, information, contracts, etc. Private security though, also plays a role in the protection of private individuals and their property on a client basis. The above functions are performed by managing the potential or actual losses incurred by, or resulting from crime. Crime prevention, also in the form of deterrence, as well as investigations, may constitute part of the function.
The Private Security Industry Regulation Act, 2001 (Act No. 56 of 2001) provides an extensive list of services qualifying as security services. The Act defines security services as meaning one or more of the following services or activities:
(a) Protecting or safeguarding a person or property in any manner;
(b) giving advice on the protection or safeguarding of a person or property, or on any other type of security service as defined in this section, or on the use of security equipment;
(c) providing a reactive or response service in connection with the safeguarding of a person or property in any manner;
(d) providing a service aimed at ensuring order and safety on the premises used for sporting, recreational, entertainment or similar purposes;
(e) manufacturing, importing, distributing or advertising of monitoring devices contemplated in section 1 of the Interception and Monitoring Prohibition Act, 1992 (Act No. 127 of 1992);
(f) performing the functions of a private investigator;
(g) providing security training or instruction to a security service provider or prospective security service provider;
(h) installing, servicing or repairing security equipment;
(i) monitoring signals or transmissions from electronic security equipment;
(j) performing the functions of a locksmith;
(k) making a person or the services of a person available, whether directly or indirectly, for the rendering of any service referred to in paragraphs (a) to (j) and (l), to another person;
(l) managing, controlling or supervising the rendering of any of the services referred to in paragraphs (a) to (l);
(m) creating the impression, in any manner, that one or more of the services referred to in paragraphs (a) to (l) are rendered. (9)
A security service provider is defined as "a person who renders a security service to another for a remuneration, reward, fee or benefit and includes such a person who is not registered as required in terms of this Act". It has to be noted that in terms of the Act, all in-house security officers are also obliged to register as well as, for example, private investigators. (10)
A broad distinction can be made between contract security and in-house security as far as the private security industry in South Africa is concerned. Three types of services are basically provided, namely a guarding service, an armed response service, and cash-in-transit operations. (11)
Larger organisations may have in-house security, which refers to a security department, protection department or risk management structure within the organisation itself. Contract security may be combined with in-house security, with each performing specific functions. Some mining houses, local authorities and financial institutions, for instance, make use of in-house security. The trend, however, is to outsource guarding services specifically to contract security. (12)
In addition to being providers of certain services, the private security industry also provides a range of electronic and other security equipment such as intrusion detection equipment, vehicle security systems and access control systems. Finally, private investigations and industrial espionage and counter-espionage are also functions provided by certain individuals or companies in the private security sector. (13)
By September 2002, the private security industry had 229 447 active security officers (186 781 in 2001), and 4 545 registered security businesses (5 815 in 2001). The industry has been growing at a rate of 12,5 per cent per annum over the last five years, and was estimated to have an annual turnover of Ri 2 billion by 1999. Foreign investment in the industry is estimated to be more than R3 billion. (14) A wide variety of services are rendered, and the categories of services registered with the Regulatory Authority are indicated in the table below. A security business may render all these services or only one or two.
The ratio of private security personnel to uniformed police officers in South Africa is approximately 4,4:1. The ratio in the United States (US) is about 3:1 . (15) No exact figures for in-house security are available, with some estimates as high as 200 000. (16)
4. SELECTED OFFICIAL SOUTH AFRICAN VIEWS REGARDING THE PRIVATE SECURITY INDUSTRY
Before discussing the contribution of South Africa's private security industry to the prevention and combating of crime, and the possibility of closer co-operation with the SAPS, some official views on the private security industry first need to be considered. It is clear that the South African authorities have, for various reasons since 1994, tended to harbour some reservations about private security.
During 1995, although crediting private security with the role played at for instance a number of public buildings and airports following the privatisation of security, the then Deputy Minister of Intelligence Services, Joe Nhlanhla, stated the following: (17)
Concern, however, is expressed over allegations against a number of private companies, particularly in strife-torn areas, suspected of being involved in criminal and unconstitutional activities. Government is also concerned about the training of units, hit squads and private armies that are involved in the massacre of people. It is the legitimate right of companies to train bodyguards and installation guards. ... But, there is the perception that third force elements see the private security industry as a haven from where to continue their third force activities of destabilisation.
It does seem that some private security firms are being used as cover for arms trade, rhino-horn smuggling, drug trafficking and illicit diamond dealings both in South Africa and beyond international borders. Industrial espionage seems to be a new area of interest.
Some reservations regarding the role of certain "private security and intelligence companies" were also expressed by the South African Coordinator for Intelligence, Linda Mti, during 1997. He stated that: (18)
Some of the greatest concerns that exist in respect of private security and intelligence companies revolve around the following issues:
-- the weaponry they have in their possession;
-- their historical links with the previous regime's security services;
-- the involvement of anti-government elements who are using the infrastructure of the industry to train, equip, channel and manage anti-constitutional and criminal activities;
-- the connections some of the actors in the private security companies have with foreign intelligence services and the similarity of objectives informed by their past co-operation in the Cold War era, ... which makes them free agents to be exploited for espionage activities; and
-- their mercenary-type role in foreign affairs.
From an intelligence perspective, which is not driven by profit or commercial interest, these activities bring the entire private security industry into disrepute. While that is the case, it is known that many of the companies and individuals involved in the industry are patriots. They can be relied upon when it comes to the defence of South Africa's national sovereignty and territorial integrity. Thus they are intent on cleaning up the industry. In co-operation with private companies, including private security companies, these patriots form a crucial building block in the campaign of waging war against crime.
Mti made some distinction between what he called private security companies and private intelligence companies, and pointed out that no legal provision is made for the latter, although the Interception and Monitoring Prohibition Act, 1992 (Act No. 127 of 1992) is relevant in this regard. His concern over private intelligence was expressed as follows: (19)
In order to remain competitive, most successful business ventures have established and operate their own intelligence capabilities to identify opportunities and to protect their production processes and technologies. Their existence is understood, not condoned. What is objectionable is the development of covert collection capabilities by private intelligence companies, and their use of these capabilities in total disregard of the Constitution and other legislation. This is cause for concern.
The General Intelligence Law Amendment Act, 2000 (Act No. 66 of 2000) also places restrictions on the employment of members of the National Intelligence Agency (NIA) or the South African Secret Service (SASS) in the private security industry for a period of three years after leaving the Agency or the Service unless a clearance certificate is provided by the Director-General. (20)
During 2000, official concern over the role of some private security companies was again expressed. The Director-General of NIA stated that quite a few of these companies are "intelligence companies", parading as research or investigation institutions. The Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence (JSCI) was investigating ways to exercise some or other form of control over these companies. (21)
In a subsequent development the Chairperson of the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Safety and Security spoke out strongly against foreign involvement in the private security industry in South Africa. It was reported that during 2000 alone, foreign companies had invested more than R1,7 billion in buying security companies in South Africa. The 11 September 2001 terror attacks in the United States (US) seemed to have played a major role in the South African government's view on foreign ownership of private security in South Africa. (22) In the Private Security Industry Regulation Act, 2001, the requirements for registration subsequently included that only citizens or permanent residents of South Africa may apply for registration as security service providers. (23) The same applies to a security business. Foreign investment in such a company remains admissible.
5. REGULATING THE PRIVATE SECURITY INDUSTRY IN SOUTH AFRICA
The Security Officers' Act, 1987 (Act No. 92 of 1987) created a now defunct statutory body, the Security Officers' Board, to exercise control over the occupation of security officers, and also provided for the compulsory registration of all contract security officers with the Board. The Board could take such steps as were necessary to maintain standards and regulate practices for security officers. It also took measures deemed expedient or necessary in connection with the training of security officers, the determination of the standards of such training, and the promotion of the maintenance of those standards. (24)
Regulations were promulgated in 1992 relating to the training of security officers, the levels of training and content of courses being determined by the Board. Following training, security officers are graded from A (highest) to E (lowest). A security service may not be rendered by an employee of a private security firm unless the employee is in possession of a training certificate issued by the Board. (25)
The Security Officers' Amendment Act, 1997 (Act No. 104 of 1997) replaced the Security Officers' Board with a Security Officers' Interim Board, which continued the functions of the previous Board. In addition, it advised the Minister of Safety and Security on the establishment of a restructured permanent board. (26)
During 2001, the Private Security Industry Regulation Act, 2001 was adopted by Parliament, and signed by the President in January 2002, replacing most of the provisions of the Security Officers' Act, 1987. The aims of the Security Industry Regulatory Authority established in terms of the new legislation, are as follows: (27)
3. The primary objects of the Authority are to regulate the security industry and to exercise effective control over the practice of the occupation of security service provider in the public and national interest and the interest of the security industry itself, and for that purpose, subject to this Act, to--
(a) promote a legitimate security industry which acts in terms of the principles contained in the Constitution and other applicable law;
(b) ensure that all security service providers act in the public and national interest in the rendering of security services;
(c) promote a security industry which is characterised by professionalism, transparency, accountability, equity and accessibility;
(d) promote stability of the private security industry;
(e) promote and encourage trustworthiness of security service providers;
(f) determine and enforce minimum standards of occupational conduct in respect of security service providers;
(g) encourage and promote efficiency in and responsibility with regard to the rendering of security services;
(h) promote, maintain and protect the status and interests of the occupation of security service provider;
(i) ensure that the process of registration of security service providers is transparent, fair, objective and concluded timeously;
(J) promote high standards in the training of security service providers and prospective security service providers;
(k) encourage ownership and control of security businesses by persons historically disadvantaged through unfair discrimination;
(l) encourage equal opportunity employment practices in the security industry;
(m) promote the protection and enforcement of the rights of security officers and other employees in the private security industry;
(n) ensure that compliance with existing legislation by security service providers is being promoted and controlled through a process of active monitoring and investigation of the affairs of security service providers;
(o) protect the interests of the users of security services;
(p) promote the development of security services which are responsive to the needs of users of such services and of the community;
(q) promote the empowerment and advancement of persons who were historically disadvantaged through unfair discrimination in the private security industry.
Furthermore, Section 28 of the Act provides for a legally binding code of conduct for security service providers. (28) It should also be noted that under the Criminal Procedure Act, 1977 (Act No. 51 of 1977), security officers enjoy the same powers of arrest as ordinary citizens (29) (unless they are contracted to perform duties at national key points).
6. THE CURRENT AND POTENTIAL ROLE OF THE PRIVATE SECURITY INDUSTRY IN COMBATING CRIME
6.1 Current role
The current role of the private security industry in South Africa as far as the combating of crime is concerned, is linked to the reasons for the growth of the industry and the advantages of private security compared with official policing. It should, however, be borne in mind that private security is not intended to replace official policing. (30)
-- While the police service has to operate under public service regulations, private security is more flexible as it can be more readily adjusted to changing consumer demands.
-- Public perceptions of police inefficiency and slow response times have translated into an increased demand for private security.
-- Private security has become more visible than the police currently, and in this sense a pro-active deterrent role regarding the combating of crime is fulfilled. It is also specifically focused on protecting a specific victim. Official policing has increasingly tended to become reactive.
-- The huge market for industrial, commercial and residential security in South Africa, means that the police cannot meet the demands due to its limited resources, and are for instance incapable of producing visible security on a 24-hour basis in most instances.
-- Access control and the development of mass private property such as large shopping centres, have generated an increased need for security which the police mostly cannot provide.
-- The private security industry is a provider of security systems such as burglar alarms and closed-circuit television cameras (CCTV), with the latter being seen as increasingly important in combating crime.
-- Increasingly, insurance companies are insisting on private security measures such as links with armed response.
Some private security companies claim that in their areas of operation, crime has been reduced to between 75 per cent and 90 per cent. (31)
6.2 Potential role
It has been stated that the distinction between public and private policing has already become blurred since armed response services rendered by private security companies already imply performing some traditional police duties. The same applies to the patrolling of certain streets by private security officers. Functions such as eviction and the policing of illegal strikes have also involved private security. (32)
Although the extension of the powers of private security has received considerable attention, it is stressed that the primary role of private security is to serve a specific client for profit. Assisting more actively in combating crime in general would therefore be a secondary role. The Security Officers' Board nevertheless submitted a policy paper to Government inter alia requesting peace officer status for certain categories of private security guards. This would include full powers of arrest, search and seizure. (33)
Although no formal co-operation agreement exists between the SAPS and the private security industry, it has been reported that the SAPS views the provision of crime intelligence and information, as well as a visible presence by private security as important factors in combating crime. (34)
A number of other potential roles have also been suggested by academics and analysts. These include the following. (35)
-- Forensic investigations, such as the photographing of crime scenes on behalf of the SAPS.
-- Criminal investigations which are already being carried out by private security (for example regarding commercial crime) could be expanded to include crimes where specialised detection skills are required and where this is available in the private sector.
-- Transporting prisoners.
-- Guards for state-owned premises and for individual state officials still guarded by the SAPS.
-- Increased responsibility for security at private functions such as sport events.
-- Aspects of police officer training.
-- Court-orderly duties.
Some other potential functions have also been suggested such as certain justice and prison-related activities, but the point is that where some of these functions are out-sourced, these need not necessarily be to private security companies.
7. PROBLEMATIC ISSUES
A number of problematic issues, however, surround the idea of an expanded role for private security. Firstly, the issue of cost. Taxpayers may well argue that they are entitled to better policing. Forcing the public (and only some can afford it) to rely increasingly on private Security, could be viewed as a dereliction of government responsibilities. In this regard the following has been remarked: "Meanwhile, at the beginning of the year most monitoring and armed reaction companies raised their fees quite steeply--in some cases as much as 25 per cent. This is way ahead of the inflation rate and is quite alarming. ... Far from being a boon, security is becoming a problem in that its cost is constantly increasing". (36) Recent mergers in the security industry could strengthen the trend towards monopolies and higher costs. It is estimated that the number of major operators could decrease from 12 in 2001 to about five in 2005. (37)
Secondly, it has been stated that "private security companies police for profit and are accountable to their clients. Extending the power of private security guards will effectively give those who employ these guards, powers and rights the general public will not have", (38)
Thirdly, while the police are accountable to various levels of government and the electorate, private security companies are primarily accountable to their clients and shareholders. (39)
Fourthly, the fact that the deterrence of crime is enhanced by the arrest and punishment of criminals, in which the police play a major role, is contrasted with the fact that although visible private security also has a deterrent effect, the main objective of the latter is reduction of the risk of crime and loss. Furthermore the increased establishment of "enclaves" protected by private security could merely lead to crime relocating to other areas that are not protected in this manner. (40)
Other issues that are mentioned (also in the context of the current role of private security) include the following: (41)
-- Overburdening of the police who respond to false alarms that are not linked to reaction and do not always meet acceptable security equipment standards.
-- Training standards which, although regulated by the security industry, are sometimes viewed as inadequate. This especially applies to firearm training and the training of grade D and E guards.
-- Criminal behaviour by security officers, such as involvement in cash-in-transit robbery, housebreaking, etc, as well as other improper conduct (for example, between 1995 and 2000, 1 835 improper conduct enquiries were instituted).
-- Underpayment of guards which led to a major strike during 2001.
-- The use of unregistered security officers.
-- The ability of the private security industry to cope with increasingly violent, more sophisticated and large-scale attacks, such as cash-in-transit robberies.
-- Unfavourable ratios of 800 to 1400 customers per single armed reaction vehicle in some cases.
It should of course be taken into account that many police officers are not well-trained either, with approximately one third of the SAPS currently illiterate. Significant numbers of police officers are also facing criminal charges or disciplinary hearings. (42) The absence of a permanent solution to crime in South Africa also results in a situation where there is a shift in crime from targets protected by private security to softer targets. (43)
A number of issues were also raised in reaction to the publication of the first draft of the Security industry Regulation Bill. The South African Police Union (SAPU) objected to the prohibition on inter alia members of the police and the military to register as security officers. The long delays in the registering of new security officers with the former Security Officers' Board was also mentioned. (43)
In the policy paper submitted to the Minister of Safety and Security by the Security Officers' Interim Board during 2000, it was stated that "(t)he Board proceeds from the premise that the strategic crime prevention and crime fighting roles of private security will continue to expand in the foreseeable future". (45) An appeal was also made for a "working partnership" between public police and private security, and it was stated that the strategic importance of the security industry is self-evident from a safety and security perspective. (46)
Undoubtedly private security does contribute to the prevention of crime, and in fact may, if the service had not existed, also have led to an increase in vigilante actions. It is nevertheless clear that private security cannot replace public policing and also that a formal co-operation agreement between the police and the private security industry on national level is not imminent. The increased and more efficient regulation of the private security industry as envisaged in the Private Security Industry Regulation Act, 2001 will hopefully also lead to higher standards of service and professionalism in the industry, and contribute to its ability
To play an important role in the combating of crime. A realisation that crime in South Africa is not only a threat to human security but more specifically that the extent of serious crime has implications for national security, is required as a first step in the more effective combating of crime, also by the official policing agencies.
REGISTERED CATEGORIES OF PRIVATE SECURITY SERVICES IN SOUTH AFRICA Security Services Number of Security Businesses Guarding and/or patrolling: Commercial, industrial 3 226 or residential Safeguarding assets in transit, providing security 680 transport Providing close personal protection/body guarding 970 Providing reaction or response services 135 Ensuring safety and order on premises (sporting, 989 recreational and entertainment) Manufacturing, importing, distributing or 103 advertising of monitoring devices Functioning as private investigators 902 Providing security training or instruction 965 Installing, servicing or repairing security e 286 equipment Providing services of a locksmith 145 Monitoring signals from electronic security 1 132 equipment (security control room) Making persons or their services available for 1 027 rendering a security service Providing security at special events 610 Car watch or related activities 150 Source: Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority, Research Enquiry, 19 September 2002, pp 1-2.
(1.) United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Report 1994, Oxford University Press, 1994, pp 24-25.
(2.) Ayoob, M, The Third World security predicatment: State making, regional conflict and the international system, Lynne Rienner, London, 1995, p 19.
(3.) Organisation of African Unity, Memorandum of Understanding on Security Stability, Development and Cooperation in Africa (CSSDCA), July 2002.
(4.) Organisation of African Unity, CSSDCA, Solemn Declaration, AHF/Decl.4 (XXXVI), July 2000.
(5.) Paris, R, "Human Security: Paradigm Shift or Hot Air?", International Security, Vol 26, No 2, 2001, pp 89 and 92.
(6.) Khong, Y F "Human Security: A Shotgun Approach to Alleviating Human Misery?, Global Governance, Vol 7, No 3, 2001, pp 231-234.
(7.) Buzan, B, People, States and Fear, Second Edition, Harvester Wheatsheaf, Hemel Hampstead, 1991, pp 112-116.
(8.) Bosch, J G S, "The role and structure of the private security industry in South Africa", ISSUP Bulletin 3/99, 1999, p 4.
(9.) Republic of South Africa, Private Security Industry Regulation Act, 2001 (Act No. 56 of 2001), section 1.
(10.) Ibid, sections 1 and 20.
(11.) Bosch, J G S, op cit, p 5.
(12.) Ibid, pp 5-6
(13.) Ibid, pp 6-7.
(14.) Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority, Research Enquiry, 19 September 2002, pp 1-2.
(15.) Schonteich, M, "Fighting crime with private muscle: The private sector and crime prevention", African Security Review, Vol 8, No 5, 1999, p 66.
(16.) Irish, J, "Policing for profit", ISS Monograph Series, No 39, August 1999, p 17; and Schonteich, M, op cit, p 23.
(17.) Nhlanhla, J, "Challenges facing the Intelligence Community in South Africa", ISSUP Bulletin, 6/95, 1995, p 3.
(18.) Mti, L M, "The role of the Intelligence Services and private security companies in crime prevention and crime combating in South Africa", ISSUP Bulletin, 5/97, 1997, pp 12-13.
(19.) Ibid, pp 10-11.
(20.) Republic of South Africa, General Intelligence Law Amendment Act, 2000 (Act No. 66 of 2000), section 22E.
(21.) Beeld (Johannesburg), 20 April 2000.
(22.) Business Day (Johannesburg), 27 September 2001.
(23.) Republic of South Africa, Private Security Industry Regulation Act, 2001, op cit, section 23.
(24.) Republic of South Africa, Security Officers Act, 1987 (Act No. 92 of 1987), section 3.
(25.) Republic of South Africa, Government Gazette, No 14178, 31 July 1992.
(26.) Republic of South Africa, Security Officers Amendment Act, 1997 (Act No. 104 of 1997), section 12.
(27.) Republic of South Africa, Private Security Industry Regulation Act, 2001, op cit, section 3.
(28.) Ibid, section 28.
(29.) Republic of South Africa, Criminal Procedure Act, 1977 (Act No. 51 of 1977).
(30.) Schonteich, M, op cit, p 67; and Irish, J, op cit, pp 5-8.
(31.) Business Report (Johannesburg), 6 December 2001.
(32.) Irish, J, op. cit, p 29; and The Star (Johannesburg), 9 March 2001.
(33.) Security Officers' Board, Policy Paper, 21 May 2000, p 220.
(34.) Schonteich, M, op cit, p 68.
(35.) Minnaar, A, partnership policing", African Security Review, Vol 8, No 2, 1999, pp 45-46.
(36.) Security Focus, April, Vol 18, No 4, 2000, p 4.
(37.) Business Report (Johannesburg), 6 December 2001.
(38.) Irish, J, op cit, p 30.
(39.) Ibid, p 9.
(40.) Ibid, pp 9-11.
(41.) Minnaar, A. op cit, pp 46-49; Beeld (Johannesburg), 7 March 2001; Beeld (Johannesburg), 6 March 2001; The Star (Johannesburg), 4 January 2001; Security Officers' Interim Board, Statistics for 2000, March 2001; and Business Report (Johannesburg), 6 December 2001.
(42.) Rapport (Johannesburg), 25 February 2001.
(43.) Business Report (Johannesburg), 6 December 2001.
(44.) Sake Beeld (Johannesburg), 29 August 2000.
(45.) Security Officers' Board, Policy Paper, op cit p 4.
(46.) Ibid, p 39.…