A simple solution to SAPS corruption and harassment

To serve and protect. Really?

So most of us have by now seen or heard about police corruption and brutality in our communities either over broadcast media like Carte Blanche or 567 talk radio. Chances are you’ve even personally encountered a rogue police officer. If you haven’t, a family member of yours has, and a friend is likely the furthest you need to go to find somebody. We don’t need to venture much further than two degrees of separation from you to find somebody who’s had to bribe a police official or been exposed to police brutality (either physically or verbally).

Now of course, when you’re in a position of having to bribe a police official – one can argue you’re in the wrong - should be arrested and likely face prosecution. But this is beside the point. Laws (such as speed limits) are drawn up by the state (or local municipality), the social apparatus of coercion and compulsion. These laws are not in place to protect the life, liberty and property of the individual but has rather become a tool for plunder of the individual. Frederic Bastiat taught us this 150 years ago in his book The Law.

This argument would take us to a different level of debate on political philosophy. What I’m interested in here is to explain and show how our South African communities can almost completely eliminate the problem of corrupt and brutal policemen.

Contrary to popular opinion the solution is simple. 

The solution will not require millions of taxpayer rands being spent on police training and increased salaries to incentivise performance. The solution will require mere months for a drastic, nay complete overhaul of the system. The solution will require absolute professionalism from the new police force. The solution will wipe out 99% of the current reported cases of corruption. The solution will lower the costs of policing considerably, and hence ease the tax burden. The solution will lead to drastically reduced levels of crime in our communities. But it will require a completely different approach from the state.

Not sure what I’m getting at? Ask yourself this: When was the last time your private community security guard failed to show up when duty called? Have they ever harassed or bribed you? Sure, perhaps they’re not law enforcers, but why can’t they be? The SAPS are here to “protect and serve,” are they not? That implies policing is a service. Policing is no different to the service provided by your dry-cleaner, hairdresser, librarian, courier service, graphic designer or economist.

Furthermore, policing is not a ‘right.’ We have no right to compel somebody else to protect us. It is the onus of the individual to protect his life, liberty and property. Laws should facilitate, not negate this.

The choice to protect oneself should be left to the individual. The free market should be left to provide cost effective and competitive solutions for policing. Rest assured, the market will provide various levels and quality of service, in the same way different courier services provide different delivery speeds, tracking and insurance options. Once our police service is left completely to the likes of ADT, Halt, etc. will there be an incentive for police to remain on the straight and narrow. The risk of losing your job and bankrupting your company will trump the incentive for short-term gains from corruption or harassment. Think the implications of an ADT Security guard bribing a customer being exposed on Carte Blanche through. What if I told you Jackie Selebi owned ADT? Will it survive longer than the SAPS?

Whether by design or coincidence, when the police is state controlled the authorities come up with laws to protect themselves, not the people. This means complex labour laws which ensures that even when a corrupt official is caught, he or she cannot be dismissed. It also means that the government comes up with more and more tiresome regulations on private individuals and business which gives the state room to expand their role and the necessary infrastructure (police and judicial system) to uphold the rule of law.

We are not proposing a utopian system of policing, for it will still be humans running the show. No human is perfect, and corruption and mistakes will abound. But it can be guaranteed that without the privileged position the SAPS shares with the state, people acting in their own self interest will ensure that the policing role is brought to much higher moral and professional standards, improving the lives and security of all.