JUN KAJEE: Ailing ANC pushes to do away with your private security

The ANC has drawn sharp criticism over proposed amendments to gun control laws through the floated Firearms Control Amendment Bill, with opponents alleging government’s efforts are less about curbing crime and more about consolidating state control.

The reforms, which include disarming security firms, restricting foreign ownership and imposing bureaucratic hurdles, coincide with efforts to limit civilian firearm access. Recent international developments have also highlighted the ANC’s broader governance failures.

A US congressional sanctions bill introduced by representative Ronny Jackson explicitly cited the ANC’s chronic mismanagement of state resources and inability to deliver basic public services, describing these failures as threats to both the SA people and the economy.

This motivation for US sanctions action against the ANC underscores mounting concerns about the SA government’s ability to ensure the basic safety of its people — a void increasingly filled by the private sector. 

SA’s private security industry is a R50bn sector employing more than 600,000 active officers — nearly four times the size of the SA Police Service (SAPS), which has just 172,906 personnel. With a police-to-population ratio of 1:359, private security fills critical gaps, providing armed response, patrols and even crisis intervention.

With a police-to-population ratio of 1:359, private security fills critical gaps, providing armed response, patrols and even crisis intervention.

During the July 2021 riots private firms protected infrastructure and communities at a time when the SAPS was stretched to its limits. As the SAPS struggled to contain widespread looting and violence, private security firms stepped in, acting as the first — and in some cases only — line of defence for community infrastructure and businesses.  

Security personnel were seen blockading entrances to suburbs and commercial areas, working alongside business owners and residents to deter looters and protect assets. In several instances private security officers used live ammunition to disperse crowds and prevent further destruction, actions that were acknowledged by the SAPS as vital to strengthening their hand in restoring order.  

These companies also collaborated with communities to organise patrols and checkpoints, particularly in areas where police presence was minimal, thereby helping to restore some semblance of safety amid the chaos.

While the sector’s actions raised important questions about oversight and the limits of private authority, their rapid and co-ordinated response was crucial in preventing an escalation of anarchy during one of SA’s most severe episodes of civil unrest. 

The government’s proposed amendments would significantly constrain private security firms’ ability to carry out their duties — especially in the context of crises such as the July 2021 riots, when these firms came to the defence of law-abiding citizens across the country: 

• Disarming security firms. By banning security officers from carrying firearms in places such as malls, schools and churches, the amendments would prevent security personnel from responding effectively to violent threats in precisely those locations where their intervention was most needed during the riots. In 2021 private security teams used armed response to deter criminality at shopping centres the SAPS had not been able to secure. The new regulations would make such interventions nearly impossible, leaving these spaces vulnerable in the event of future unrest.
• Bureaucratic overload. The requirement for annual psychological evaluations, vague limits on ammunition (“reasonable quantity”), and the need to register even basic tools such as handcuffs would impose heavy administrative and financial burdens on security companies. During the 2021 riots the ability of private security to mobilise quickly and decisively was central to its success; under the proposed rules, delays and uncertainty about compliance could paralyse rapid response, particularly if they must seek approvals for equipment or risk being found noncompliant for ill-defined reasons. 
• Eliminating self-defence. Removing self-defence as a valid reason for firearm ownership further disempowers both security professionals and ordinary citizens in a country with high violent crime rates. In the July 2021 unrest security officers and civilians alike relied on legal firearms to protect lives and property when state resources were simply absent. The amendments would strip away this last line of defence, potentially emboldening criminals, who are undeterred by legal restrictions. The DA’s Ian Cameron called the proposals “draconian,” noting they would “disarm those trying to prevent crime”.   

The ANC insists the reforms aim to “improve oversight” and curb rogue operators. However, critics highlight a pattern of policies that weaken nonstate security actors while the SAPS remains underfunded and ineffective:   

• The SAPS budget has declined by 5% in real terms since 2019.
• The ANC spends R1.7bn annually on VIP protection for politicians while pushing laws that limit private security and civilian self-defence. 
• The clause restricting foreign ownership aligns with the ANC’s broader BEE agenda, which critics say prioritises ideological control over practical crime-fighting.   

Opposition parties and industry leaders argue the ANC is exploiting the crime crisis to centralise security power. By stifling private firms and disarming citizens the state could position itself as the sole — albeit unreliable — security provider, deepening public dependence on government institutions under their dominance.   

The ANC’s current drive to impose sweeping regulations on the private security sector risks fuelling a surge in crime by in effect disarming security firms in a country where 76% of citizens already live in fear of violent crime. The economic consequences could be severe, with over-regulation threatening the livelihoods of more than 580,000 workers and potentially forcing many security businesses into liquidation.

Such moves also deepen the erosion of public trust, as opposition leaders warn the ANC is systematically making it harder for ordinary people to protect themselves. These policies risk leaving South Africans more vulnerable and increasingly sceptical of a government that appears unable — or unwilling — to ensure their safety. 

While the ANC frames these reforms as necessary for accountability, the timing and scope suggest a deeper agenda. By weakening private security — a sector that outperforms the SAPS in virtually all measures of reach and responsiveness — the ANC may be prioritising control over solutions to SA’s crime epidemic. With the party’s credibility waning amid economic stagnation and corruption scandals, the crippling of a vital safety net could further erode public trust, leaving millions exposed in the name of political consolidation.   

• Kajee is a lecturer at Southern Utah University, a non-resident research fellow at the Korea Institute for Maritime Strategy and a researcher for the SeaLight maritime transparency initiative at Stanford University’s Gordian Knot Center for National Security Innovation.