please see
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=3045&art_id=vn20070912041033835C806219and in response, I would sayObservations herein are anecdotal, yet substantive in questioning some of the reasoning around the spate of violent crime in SA by the ISS’s Antony Altbeker.
The given analysis is skewed in ascribing the upsurge in violent crime in SA to policy choices and failures after 1994. It does not take into account of the embeddedness of violence in South African culture and everyday life. The country’s violent history spans decades, if not centuries. We come from a time, not so long ago, where the state’s use of force was a natural tool to illicit or maintain certain status quos. Inversely, citizens used violence to bring the state’s attention to injustices.
The culture of violence permeates through South African culture despite a dramatic switch in political dispensation in 1994. For example, when workers or ordinary citizens are disgruntled, they take to the streets. Infrastructure must be trashed and burned down before the point is made. This is not a result of a post 1994 fumble in policy formulation, but an extension of the country’s close relationship with the use of force. The crime problem was not “created” post 1994, as is proposed by Altbeker. Criminal behaviour is synonymous with South African History, be it by the state or ordinary citizens.
The country is yet to reconcile and address the historical relationship between law enforcement and the citizen. Not so long ago, the Policeman was a figure of brute and force. The prudent thing to do for a citizen during that time thus, was to defy law enforcement. Though this may not be the case now, police have not fully transcended that image. By extension the relationship between the Police and citizens remains problematic. One cannot therefore speak of police as “armed social workers” in a country where police wield unconcealed firearms, and walking into your local Standard Bank, you might be greeted by a security guard, casually wielding an AK 47. Besides creating a state of public inertia, this speaks to how casual we are as a country with issues and instruments of violence. Police, it can be argued, many times fail to fulfill the function of serving and protecting. They continue to be forceful in their enforcement of the law, as a rule, and not the exception.
It is a gross oversimplification of matters to draw one-track parallels between violent crime and the deficit in the number of people the country has behind bars. Combating crime is not a simple matter of jailing more people. An increased incarceration rate cannot be the only consideration and cure in doing so
Altbeker’s analysis also joins the chorus singing South Africa “lost its marbles” in 1994. This is not so. This country has functioned without marbles from time immemorial. The country as it is, is a manifestation of sustained trauma, which births, nurses and reinforces itself with every atrocious event reported. This is what we need to reconcile as a country form all areas, including law enforcement. If anything, the country needs to rehabilitate itself and continue to nurture non-violent ways as far as possible. This is not to say that a more robust law enforcement programme need not come into effect. The increase in and effect of violent crime is horrendous and cannot be ignored. But jailing more people is not the only answer.
this is merely a thought on my part so far... a rough draft. please let me know before quoting elsewhere besides AG. any takers?
Show Posts
