PRESIDENT Jacob Zuma is constantly surrounded by 22 police bodyguards, says the SA Policing Union.
The bodyguards are drawn from a team of 88 members of the presidential close-protection unit.
This is in stark contrast to the protection from criminal violence available to the ordinary citizen. The ratio of police officers to citizens is one police officer for every 346 citizens.
Last year The Times revealed that the police had 1998 VIP bodyguards and 230 Presidential Protection Services members to provide security to cabinet ministers, provincial premiers and MECs.
But, said the union, the 88 Zuma bodyguards are not among this number.
Questions have been raised about the size of Zuma‘s security detail — and the reason for it.
The police unit that manages presidential close-protection would not say why Zuma needs such a large security detail.
The Treasury reports that the 2016-2017 budget for the police protection and security services programme was R2.6-billion for 6445 personnel, with more than 5000 of them believed to be VIP bodyguards.
The budget was R2.4-billion in the 2015-2016 financial year.
A report by a parliamentary monitoring group in October showed that, of the R2.6-billion, R1.25-billion was spent on Presidential Protection Services.
Risk analysts, governance academics and VIP security experts have questioned the credibility of the threats Zuma faces. They raised concerns about compromising the police crime intelligence agency that assesses the threat level against Zuma and said the number of bodyguards assigned to him is more a show of force than a counter to threat.
Alex van den Heever, a professor at the Wits School of Governance, said the threats to Zuma were largely internal to the ANC.
“Zuma is not under threat from another party or an external organisation. The ANC is under threat from itself.
“The kinds of political threats against Zuma have nothing to do with assassination but [with] normal legal processes. [Zuma] cannot use his VIP protection unit to protect himself from impeachment or prosecution for fraud.”
Van den Heever said the way Zuma used his VIP bodyguards appeared to be an attempt to make himself look powerful.
But Koffi Kouakou, also of the Wits School of Governance, said the government had noted people‘s anger being directed at Zuma and that had translated into over-hyped security for him.
“There have been attempts on his life. Poisoning. Hurling insults in public places. Booings at stadiums,” he said.
Last year allegations arose that one of Zuma‘s wives, Nompumelelo Ntuli-Zuma, had tried to poison him but she has not been charged.
In September, Zuma‘s brother, Michael, told the Sunday Times that the family feared for the president‘s life. But at the time State Security Minister David Mahlobo said he did not know of such threats.
Michael Zuma would not say this week whether the family still feared for the president‘s life.
The police, the Presidency and the State Security Agency refused to respond to questions relating to threats against Zuma.
Police spokesman Brigadier Mashadi Selepe said: “The department has noted with concern your attempts to invade the security and operations of the Protection and Security Services domain of the SAPS. The department will not dignify with a response any attempts to compromise the safety and security of our principals.”
But a senior police officer with knowledge of Zuma‘s protection said: “The old man is paranoid. No one is sure what really informed the increase [in bodyguards] but it‘s clear that he sees everyone in the country as an enemy.”
Police union president Mpho Kwinika questioned the police‘s silence on the matter: “When the police refuse to answer to why Zuma has so many guards one must question the credibility of the so-called threats he faces.
“No one wants operational information but we want to know what‘s going on,” Kwinika said.
Garth Fuchs, of risk assessment company DeltaOne International, said: “The size of the VIP protection unit is motivated as a show of power within South Africa‘s foreign and domestic policy rather than [corresponding to] any direct or indirect threat towards the country‘s political leadership.
“Since the advent of democracy, when [Nelson] Mandela faced credible threats from rightwingers, there hasn‘t been a credible increase in threats to justify the security posture to protect the president.”
Of African countries, he said Egypt had the largest presidential security detail, followed by South Africa.
“Egypt, however, faces daily terrorist attacks and assassinations.”
Rory Steyn, director of VIP protection company Nicholls-Steyn and Associates and a former police VIP protection unit commander, said the deployment of resources must be done on the basis of a credible threat analysis.
“South Africa has tangible threats against VIPS but they are the same threats all South Africans face daily — crime.”
He said the VIP protection unit did not have its eye on the ball.
“There is a lot of politicking. If I were in the Presidential Protection Services I would need to know that the intelligence agents are not playing political games.”
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.