Reports Released
Recommendations pertaining to Complaints Registry
~ ~ ~ ~
Report on 16 days of activism
~ ~ ~ ~
Paper on prevention of police torture
~ ~ ~ ~
Briefing to the PC on Safety and Security (pdf)
~ ~ ~ ~
Annual Report 2000/2001 (pdf)
~ ~ ~ ~
Budget Vote Speech
~ ~ ~ ~

23 January 2001

1. BACKGROUND

The ICD’s statutory mandate is to investigate deaths in custody or as a result of police action and acts of misconduct or criminal offences allegedly committed by the members of the South African Police Services (SAPS). However, over the period of its existence, the Department has received a large number of complaints that should ideally have been properly dealt with by the police. These are essentially service-related complaints.

In fact, from the 8000 complaints received by the ICD over the past four years, 30% thereof (approximately 2400) are service-related complaints. In the main, the complaints under reference fall into one or more of the following categories:

  1. Rude or discourteous treatment of members of the public by a members of the SAPS;
  2. Blatant disrespect and/or use of offensive or derogatory words or terms by members of the SAPS against members of the public;
  3. Inconsiderate, intolerant and insensitive conduct by members of the SAPS towards a member of the public especially children and victims of alleged sexual offences;
  4. Failure or neglect by members of the SAPS to give progress reports on cases to complainants or victims;
  5. Lack of or slow response by the police when called to scenes of crime;
  6. Misunderstanding and/or a communication breakdown between the members of the SAPS and complainants or victims;
  7. General discourtesy in dealing with members of the public.

The manner in which the current National Commissioner was treated at Brooklyn police station is a classic example of the prevailing situation. Consequently, ICD officials have spent considerable time investigating and monitoring such complaints. This has had the effect of detracting the ICD’s attention from its statutory mandate of investigating alleged criminal offences and acts of misconduct.  

2. EFFECTS OF COMPLAINTS ON THE RELATIONS BETWEEN THE SAPS AND THE PUBLIC

The kinds of complaints referred to in paragraph 1 above are largely a source of estranged relations between the police and the public and between certain police stations and the communities being served by those police stations. On the one hand, these complaints lead members of the public to lose faith in the police and, on the other hand, the complaints lead to hostile relations between the police and the members of the public.

In the short term, the complaints under reference contribute to the deteriorating relations between the police and the public. In the long term, the situation leads to further erosion of the credibility and the image of the police in the eyes of the public. On a broader scale, the situation contributes to degenerating standards in policing country-wide and thus poor service delivery by the police.

3. EFFECT OF COMPLAINTS ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ICD

The above situation results in the ICD being flooded by complaints that detracts it from its core functions. Considerable time and resources is spent on attending to the problems under reference instead of cases of serious misconduct or offences allegedly committed by members of the SAPS. More importantly, the complaints are also a source of unnecessary tension between the ICD and the SAPS.

The ICD regards it as its duty not only to highlight the problems in the SAPS but to also make appropriate recommendations with a view to solving the identified problems. It is in this spirit that this document is written and submitted. It is also in this spirit that the ICD’s endeavours generally should be understood.

4. THE ICD’S RESPONSE TO THE PROBLEMS

While it is known that police investigate alleged acts of misconduct and criminal offences against their members, it is doubtful whether they have a proper system in place to handle service-related complaints lodged by members of the public. The assumption herein is that either the police do not have a system or mechanism in place or that the existing mechanism or system, if any, has not been effective. A consequence of this is both a flooding of ICD with service related complaints and the continued deterioration of the relations between the police and the public.

The ICD has identified this as a systemic problem and decided to look into the following:

  1. Whether or not the police have a mechanism, process or system to handle the type of complaints under reference;
  2. Whether or not the mechanism, process or system, if any, is effective; and
  3. How the situation could be improved.

In line with the aforegoing, during the period between 1 March and 30 March 2000, the ICD conducted a study aimed at addressing the problem under discussion. The study was confined to the Gauteng Province.

5. OBJECTIVES OF THE ICD STUDY

The objectives of the study was to determine whether or not the police have an established system, mechanism or process of handling service-related complaints and if so; whether it is uniform, understood, consistently applied and effective. The study was premised on the notion that either the police do not have a system in place to handle service related complaints or, if such a system exists, it has not been effective. Pursuant to that, the process hereunder was followed.

6. METHODOLOGY

6.1 In conducting the study, a sample of five police stations was selected. They are the following:

  1. Sunnyside
  2. Atteridgeville
  3. Tembisa
  4. Kempton Park
  5. Actonville

6.2 In addition, two Area Commissioners for the following areas were selected as respondents:

  1. North-Rand
  2. Pretoria

6.3 Furthermore, the Gauteng Provincial Commissioner was identified as a potential respondent.

6.4 Police officers at Community Service Centres were selected at random and interviewed during visits at police stations.

6.5 A standard questionnaire was used to conduct interviews. In designing the questionnaire, the

SAPS Standing Order 101(SO 101) was used as a guide. SO 101 provides that:

  1. A person lodging a complaint at a police station against the Police or a specific member must be treated politely. A full statement, including the particulars of the place where, the date on which and the time at which the incident occurred, must be taken from the complainant and immediately be handed to the station commander or another senior member for necessary investigation. An entry in the occurrence book must also immediately be made and the entry number be handed to the complainant.
  2. Should the complaint be related to a criminal offence, a case docket for investigation shall be opened and be sent to the station where the crime was committed for registration in the crime register.
  3. Complainants must not be referred to other police stations to lay their charges. When a complaint or incident is forwarded by Head Office or a Regional Head Office for investigation, an officer must personally (not by telephone) interview the complainant immediately in order to obtain more complete information for investigation. After finalization of this investigation, the complainant must again be personally interviewed by an officer to inform him of the results. Full particulars of the relevant officer, his station, the date(s) and time (s) of the interviews, full particulars of what had been conveyed to the complainant and his reaction must be noted in the Regional Commissioner’s report and be submitted within thirty (30) days after receipt of the complaint. Should the complainant not have been interviewed, the reasons for this must be furnished in full.

7. DATA COLLECTED DURING INTERVIEWS

7.1 Respondent: Area Commissioner, North Rand

Date : 17/03/2000

  • The Deputy Area Commissioner was interviewed in the presence of the Head of Legal Services, Head of Detectives and the Human Resource Manager.
  • He has been attached to the Area for the past two years.
  • He has fifteen (15) police stations under his jurisdiction and his office receives service related complaints. Such complaints are sent in by telephone, or through letters from complainants. Some complaints are referred to his office by the National Commissioner.
  • The complaints are handed over to the Human Resource Manager who will then assign each complaint to an officer for investigation. Such an officer is advised to apply the provisions of Standing Order 101.
  • There is a register wherein complaints are registered and kept for statistical purposes. A copy of the said register was not available when requested.
  • The Human Resources section is the one that assigns complaints for investigation.
  • Complainants are kept informed about the progress and/or outcomes on their complaints.
  • The Deputy Area Commissioner said there was no problem with the system used to handle complaints except the application of the system by the Investigating Officers.

7.2 Respondent: Area Commissioner, Pretoria

Date: 17/03/2000

  • The Deputy Area Commissioner was interviewed in the presence of the Head of Detectives in this area.
  • He has 28 police stations under his jurisdiction.
  • Service-related complaints are received by the Detective Unit who keep such complaints in a register and assigns the complaints to an Investigating Officer who will investigate and provide a report on the agreed brought- forward date.
  • His office has a Standing Order 101 Pro-forma reporting form that is used to record and handle the complaints.
  • Statistics of complaints are kept and handed to the Area Commissioner on a trimester basis.
  • The Area Commissioner’s office only manages the misconduct and criminal cases. Service-related complaints are referred to the relevant police stations.
  • Where a complaint is against a Station Commissioner of the relevant police station, a complaint is assigned to an Investigating Officer of an equal or senior rank from another police station to investigate such a complaint.
  • Complainants are kept informed about the progress of their complaints and information is entered in the file and reported on the brought forward date.
  • The Deputy Area Commissioner said there were no problems with the system used and that the Pro-forma applied makes it easy to handle the complaints.

7.3 Respondent: Head of Community Service Component: Sunnyside Police Station

Date: 14/03/2000

  • He has been attached to the police station since November 1999.
  • He receives at least five (5) complaints monthly.
  • He refers the complaints to the Captain in charge of the Community Service Centre who will personally investigate the complaint.
  • If a complaint is against the Captain in charge of the Community Service Centre, it will be investigated by another Captain in the same section.
  • If a complaint is against detectives, such complaint goes to the Head of the component.
  • The Investigating Officer assigned to investigate the complaint will meet the complainant and obtain a statement and investigate such a complaint.
  • Records of complaints are kept in a register. Only complaints of a serious nature are kept in the register. Others are addressed orally and are not registered.
  • Complaints are received through letters from complainants, through referrals from inter alia, ICD, Human Rights Commission, Public Protector and the Department of Safety & Security. Other complaints are reported personally by the complainants.
  • There is no notice in the Community Service Centre advising members of the public to report their complaints (if any) about officers attached to the police station.
  • There is no specific officer assigned to deal with the complaints. Any Captain in charge of the Community Service Centre may receive and investigate complaints.
  • Complainants are kept informed about progress and also, a progress report is given to the Area Commissioner in a prescribed format.
  • Progress reports are also given to the Station Commissioner for a decision prior to being sent to the Area Commissioner on a monthly basis. A brought forward system is also applied.
  • The Head of the Community Service Component said there were no problems in the procedure applied in dealing with the complaints. He said the problem lies with police officers who lack compassion and poor interpersonal relations.
  • The Head also stated that training in service delivery should be conducted and furthermore guidance for good interpersonal skills should be given to police officers.

7.4 Respondent: Investigating Officer – Sunnyside Police Station

Date: 14/03/2000

  • He receives complaints from the Area Commissioner, the ICD or complainants themselves.
  • The Station Commissioner normally instructs that such cases be handled by a specific Officer.
  • In the last three months, he handled five (5) recorded complaints - others were solved there and then and not recorded.
  • Once a complaint is received, a complainant is called and thereafter an appointment is made for a meeting with the complainant. The Officer opens a file to keep records of investigations. After completion of an investigation, the file is sent to the Station Commissioner for inspection and if it was received from the Head Office or the ICD, a report will be sent to the referral body.
  • Complainants are kept informed about the progress of their complaints. This is done telephonically and after completion of an investigation, an appointment is made with the complainant to explain the outcome of the investigation.
  • The Officer once handled a complaint about a senior officer but the complaint was addressed verbally.
  • Normally, if there is a need for an investigation of a complaint against a senior officer, the matter is referred to the Senior Superintendent. The Officer may only investigate complaints against an officer of equal or junior rank.
  • Records of complaints are kept in a Complaints Register. The Station Commissioner uses the same Complaints Register to record the complaints.
  • The time frame for the investigation of a complaint is between 14 and 21 days.
  • The problem is when complaints are referred from other sources, unlike when complainants report personally, the line of communication is very long and time consuming. It is easier to deal with complaints that are brought to the police station directly.
  • Complaints should ideally be investigated by officers serving at other stations and not in the same station.

7.5 Respondent: Station Commissioner - Atteridgeville Police Station

Date: 15/03/2000

  • He has been in his position since 1995 and is receiving complaints on a daily basis.
  • Complaints received are handled differently depending on their nature. Complaints, which are regarded as minor, are addressed immediately after receipt and no records of such complaints are kept in a register. Those that are considered serious are recorded in a register.
  • Most complaints arise as a result of a communication breakdown between the police and members of the public. Such complaints are addressed verbally and thorough explanations are given as to why a particular action or decision was taken.
  • Records of complaints are kept in the Station Commissioner’s diary. Some complaints are written on a piece of paper on which instructions are given for the complainant’s attention.
  • Statistics are not kept, but most complaints come through telephonically and the Station Commissioner normally advises people to come in personally.
  • There is no notice in the Community Service Centre that advises members of the public to lodge complaints (if any) at the office of the Station Commissioner. However, the Station Commissioner liaises with the Community Policing Forum (CPF) to urge members of the public to come and lodge complaints, if any, against the police.
  • There is no specific Officer assigned to deal with complaints; all complaints are handled by the relevant Heads of components.
  • Complainants are informed about the progress of their complaints telephonically.
  • The Station Commissioner always makes follow-ups on complaints received.
  • The Station Commissioner stated that there are no problems in the system that he is applying. He however felt that there should be an effective CPF to monitor police activity because a CPF represents the community and that would foster a good relationship between the police and the community.

7.6 Respondent: Investigating Officer – Atteridgeville Police Station

Date: 15/03/2000

  • The Investigating Officer holds the rank of Captain and is the Head in charge of the Community Service Centre. Most complaints come through to his office en route to that of the Station Commissioner. The Station Commissioner refers some of the complaints to him as well. In the past three months he had received ± 30 complaints.
  • If the complaint relates to an existing case, he goes through the relevant docket and explains the situation to the complainant. With regard to other complaints, he resolves the problem amicably between and in the presence of the parties involved.
  • Only complaints received from the Minister, Head Office and Internal SI are addressed according to the provision of Standing Order 101.
  • Complainants are kept informed about the progress of their complaints and this is done either through visits or telephonically.
  • Most of the complaints he handles are about close colleagues. In dealing with such complaints, he does not experience a conflict of interest.
  • Records of complaints are kept in a register. The register kept by the Officer is different from that kept by the Station Commissioner. In some instances the Officer opens files of complaints.
  • The Officer keeps all complaints, that is, those relating to both the detectives and the uniformed members in the same register that he keeps in his office.
  • An investigation of every complaint must be completed within 30 days.
  • There are no problems with the system that is being applied.

7.7 Respondent: Deputy Station Commissioner - Tembisa Police Station

Date: 15/03/2000

This meeting was attended by all members of the management team except for the Station Commissioner who was on sick leave. After a brief presentation on the objectives of the study, the Deputy Station Commissioner was interviewed privately.

  • He has been in his position since 1996.
  • He received complaints, but most of them were not serious. Every complaint is assessed; if it is serious, it is dealt with in terms of Standing Order 101 and feedback is given to the complainant. In the last three months, he has received only one serious complaint.
  • Some of the complaints lodged relate to court procedures and decisions such as why an accused has been granted bail.
  • Previously, he has kept records of complaints in the manager’s diary. Of late, he has introduced a register wherein he records the complaints.
  • In most instances complainant’s come in personally to report their complaints.
  • He uses a local newspaper to inform members of the public to report complaints (if any) about police members to his office. However, there is no notice to the same effect in the Community Service Centre.
  • The Head of the Community Service Centre personally deals with the complaints.
  • Particulars such as names and addresses of complainants are recorded so that after the completion of an investigation, feedback is given to the complainant.
  • The Head of the Community Service Centre conducts liaison with the complainant and monitors the progress of the case.
  • He does not experience problems with the system in place; it is effective and he has previously received commendations from complainants.
  • He feels that police officers should receive training in interpersonal skills and customer service and should upgrade their levels of education.

7.8 Respondent: Investigating Officer – Tembisa Police Station

Date: 15/03/2000

  • He has received complaints from among others, the ICD, Human Rights Commission and the Public Protector.
  • In the last three months he has received only three complaints – one each from the ICD, the community and a member of the public respectively.
  • He does not know Standing Order 101, but he tries to address and solve the complaints which he receives.
  • He keeps complainants informed about the progress on the investigation of their complaints as well as the outcome at the end of an investigation. He does this verbally or by sending letters to the complainants.
  • In the three months preceding the study, he has never received a service –related complaint. He only received cases of serious misconduct.
  • He keeps records of complaints in a personal register. The Commissioner also keeps records separately.
  • He sets a time frame for the completion of an investigation of a complaint. He felt that he often does not have enough time to address or investigate the complaints.
  • He felt that the problems with the system in place is that complaints are not handled by a specific officer and as such, his workload becomes heavy because he has to attend to other investigations of alleged crime and/or misconduct as well.

7.9 Respondent: Station Commissioner - Kempton Park Police Station

Date: 16/03/2000

  • He has been in his position since 1989.
  • He has been receiving complaints ever since, most of them were referred by the Area Commissioner – North Rand and by the ICD.
  • Once a complaint has been received, he assigns an officer to deal with the complaint according to the provisions of Standing Order 101. Among others, the relevant Officer must make an appointment and meet the complainant.
  • Before the meeting, the investigating officer must assess the complaint/investigate the nature thereof so that when he meets with the complainant, he should be in a position to give adequate advice.
  • 99% of the complaints are lodged as a result of failure by the Investigating Officers to give feedback to complainants on progress in criminal cases.
  • He does not keep statistics of complaints. He keeps only copies of reports (files) of complaints in the Police Station’s Archives.
  • He keeps a register for positive complaints – that is, complaints warranting an investigations - in the Human Resources section. In the past three months he registered only two positive complaints.
  • He does not have a notice in the Community Service Centre that informs members of the public to report their complaints to the Station Commissioner but he uses a local newspaper as well as a website page for this purpose.
  • He has assigned two officers to deal with complaints and ensures that complainants are kept informed of progress in the investigation of their complaints.
  • He always signs all reports and a brought forward-system is used, according to which after a case has been assigned, a date is given to report back and that date is called the brought-forward date. The system helps to monitor progress on complaints.
  • He stated that he does not have problems with the system. However, at times the line of communication in dealing with a complaint is too long. This is especially the case when a complaint is referred by the ICD, Area Commissioner and Internal Service Investigation (ISI). Each of these bodies is supposed to receive a report on each complaint received from them.
  • He is of the opinion that a sector policing system should be introduced and each sector should have its own police station.
  • He also felt that officers who deal with the public should manage Client Service centres and if no complaints are received, the police should conduct house visits to elicit complaints. He however felt that to do that, there must be an increase in personnel.

7.10 Respondent: Investigating Officer – Kempton Park Police Station

Date: 16/03/2000

  • The Station Commissioner assigns complaints to him. He records such complaints in a diary on a brought-forward system. In the past three months he has received only one complaint.
  • He stated that there were six Officers assigned to handle complaints. This statement contradicted what the Station Commissioner stated about Officers handling complaints. According to the Station Commissioner, only two Officers have been assigned to handle complaints.
  • There is no uniformity in the handling of complaints. Each complaint is dealt with differently depending on its nature.
  • Normally, after receipt, he puts the complaint on his brought forward system and sets up an appointment with the complainant to obtain a statement. After meeting and taking a statement from the complainant, he submits his report to the Station Commissioner who would then send the report to the Area Commissioner.
  • A complaint is normally finalised within two weeks.
  • He keeps the complainants informed about the progress of their complaints.
  • He has never handled a complaint against a close colleague and he believes that one could never be objective in such a case.
  • The records of the complaints assigned to him are kept as files in the office of the Station Commissioner together with the register of those complaints.
  • He is allowed two to three weeks to complete an investigation of a complaint and felt that the time allocated is normally enough to finalise an investigation.
  • He felt that there were no problems in this system used at the police station.

7.11 Respondent: Investigating Officer: Kempton Park Police Station

Date: 16/03/2000

  • He receives complaints referred to him by the Station Commissioner via the Branch Commissioner.
  • In the last three months he has only handled one complaint.
  • After receiving a complaint, he records it in the brought forward system. He studies the nature or the seriousness of the complaint then makes an appointment for a meeting. If it is a docket-related complaint, he takes it along to the meeting and then he will show it to the complainant and explain what needs to be done. Thereafter he would give feedback on the progress and decision taken about the complaint.
  • He normally reports back to the complainant telephonically and if possible, visits the complainant as well.
  • He has never handled a complaint against a close colleague or an officer of senior or equal rank.
  • He records complaints and keeps copies of all correspondence in his diary. He is allowed a minimum of fourteen (14) days to finalise a complaint but felt that the time allocated is not enough.
  • He experiences no problems with the system that is being applied at the Police Station.

7.12 Respondent: Station Commissioner - Actonville Police Station

Date: 16/03/00

  • He has been in this position for the past four years.
  • He has received three complaints in the past three months. The said complaints were solved immediately after receipt.
  • In dealing with complaints, he uses Standing Order 101 as a guide. He normally nominates an officer to interview the complainant.
  • Normally, the respective Heads of different sections attend to complainants – he only deals with complaints against Heads of units.
  • When a complaint is lodged against him, he will arrange that an Officer from another station handles the complaint.
  • After identifying a problem that led to the complaint, he rectifies the defect and apologizes to the complainant. Normally, he would explain the procedures followed and irrespective of whether the complaint is legitimate or illegitimate, he makes it a point that the complainant is satisfied.
  • Some complaints are lodged as a result of stereotypes, prejudice and hidden agendas; for instance, a complainant hoping to acquire an indirect benefit by putting an Officer in trouble.
  • Recently, he has engaged his management team in a brainstorming session on how best to deal with complaints. They conducted an analysis of complaints and developed a plan of action to rectify the problem of wrong perceptions.
  • His basic philosophy and approach is to understand, compromise and have tolerance in managing police-community relationships.
  • He also engages the local Community Policing Forum to address some of the problems.
  • He always attends to complaints in good faith and strives to build good relations by doing the right thing.
  • He keeps records in the complainant’s file and ensures that it is registered. Contrary to this statement, during the interview, he stated that he does not keep a register of complaints.
  • Complainants often lodge complaints personally and at times they are not sure as to where to lodge their complaints. This is because there is no information that advises members of the public where to lodge their complaints.
  • The majority of complaints are about police reaction time soon after a crime is reported. Other complaints relate to failure by Investigating Officers to give progress on an investigation.
  • He uses the local Community Policing Forum and the police station’s communication section for disseminating information but there is no such information in the Community Service Centre.
  • The Client Service manager attends to service delivery issues since he is the first line of management.
  • He ensures that complainants are informed about the progress of their complaints, though not the disciplinary steps taken as a result of their complaints.
  • He always has to receive final reports on how complaints have been dealt with because he controls the register.
  • He experiences no problems with the system that he has put in place except for complaints which, even though solved, the complainant wishes to take further.
  • In his opinion, people are generally agitating for improved service and as such he is working towards reinforcing service delivery.
  • He believes that all complaints, whether right or wrong, should be received.
  • He constantly strives to analyse problems so that they should be solved amicably.

7.13 Respondent: Investigating Officer – Actonville Police Station

Date: 16/03/2000

He is the Head of the Client Service Division.

He receives most complaints from the Area Commissioner or Provincial Commissioner. Only a few are reported directly by the complainants. He also receives other complaints from the ICD, Attorneys or the Human Rights Commission. His problem in this regard is that he deals directly with an agent and not the complainant.

He has received four complaints during the past three months. One came from the ICD and 3 from the Human Rights Commission.

He normally interviews the complainant to find out the core of the matter. Such interviews are either through personal visits or telephonically. If there is substance in the complaint, he takes a statement and thereafter investigates any misconduct or reason for the complaint.

He sometimes would further inquire from the complainant if there is, in his/her opinion, any mechanism that can be used to solve the problem.

If there is a decision to take disciplinary action, he would immediately hand the matter over for departmental prosecution.

He believes there is a need to train the police in service delivery.

He keeps the complainants informed of the progress either through correspondence or personal visits.

He has never handled a complaint against a close colleague or an officer of an equal rank but believes that he would be able to handle it like any other case.

He does not keep a register or record but keeps only files of complaints.

He has not been given time limits within which to finalise complaints except those referred by the Area Commissioner which he must finalise, at the earliest, within 21 days or, at the latest, within a month. Under certain circumstances, the prescribed period is enough but in other instances, it is not enough.

He believes the procedure the police station is using is satisfactory. Further, that the police-community relations should be improved through the Community Policing Forum as that would create an awareness of structures in the Police. He is also of the opinion that Standing Order 101 is not adequate. It gives an officer wide discretion and as such it is impossible to measure the standard of service delivery.

8. DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

8.1   Receipt and handling of service-related complaints

8.1.1 There is no uniform system in the SAPS for handling complaints. Every police station has its own way of handling the complaints.

8.1.2 Even at police station level, there is no consistency in the manner in which complaints are handled.

8.1.3 At many police stations there are no specific Officers assigned to deal with complaints. Complaints are dealt with in an ad-hoc and random manner.

8.1.4 There is no way to ensure that the Station Commissioner is kept abreast of the complaints lodged by members of the public.

8.1.5 In some police stations, Officers who handle complaints are not even aware of the provisions of Standing Order 101.

8.1.6 In general, the manner of addressing complaints is left to the discretion of individual officers.

8.2   Recording of complaints

8.2.1 At a number of police stations there are no registers for complaints. It follows therefore that the complaints are not recorded and thus no statistics are kept.

8.2.2 At other police stations complaints are recorded in either personal diaries of Officers or on pieces of paper.

8.2.3 There are police stations at which registers of complaints are kept. The registers differ in structure and content from one police station to another.

8.2.4 In a number of instances, complaints are addressed verbally and thus no records thereof are kept.

8.2.5 The question whether a complaint is recorded or not is left to the discretion of individual officers. Certain complaints such as response times to crime scenes are not considered serious and as such, no records are kept of such complaints.

8.2.6 Of the recorded complaints, most complaints are misconduct and criminal acts by the police. This is only done in police stations where there is a complaints register.

8.2.7 In police stations, where a register is kept, all divisions use one register that is kept by either the Station Commissioner or the Human Resources Manager.

8.2.8 Most registers do not make provision for the particulars of the complainant. Provision is generally made for the investigating officer and the date on which the complaint was received.

8.2.9 Not all registers have a category for the nature of the complaint. This is the case in instances where a register is a personal diary of an Officer.

8.2.10 In one police station, the Station Commissioner is using a diary as a register and his investigating officer uses his own form of a register. The Station Commissioner did not know of the existence of the other register because when he was asked about a register used to record complaints, he stated that the only register kept is his diary.

8.2.11 In all registers kept, there is no provision to record the steps taken to address a complaint.

8.3 Application of Standing Order 101

8.3.1 Standing Order 101 is not applied in all complaints. Reasons given are that some complaints are solved verbally and telephonically and as a result, such complaints are not filed or registered. Some officers consider Standing Order 101 to be inadequate.

8.3.2 Other Officers do not even know what Standing Order 101 is or the provisions thereof. Such Officers use their own discretion in solving or dealing with service-related complaints.

8.3.3 The Pretoria Area Commissioner has designed a Pro-forma for Standing Order 101. This was designed solely for officers who do not know the provisions of the Standing Order and also those who cannot apply it. The Pro-forma is not used in all complaints. It is used only in complaints referred by the Area Commissioner. At one police station in Pretoria, Officers did not even know about the Pro-forma.

8.4 Statistics of Reported Complaints

8.4.1 Only one Area (Pretoria) keeps statistics of complaints reported to the Area Commissioner. Statistics are documented in a graphical form.

8.4.2 Other stations do not keep statistics because complaints are not always recorded and there are no complaints registers.

8.4.3 In other police stations, statistics kept are those of cases referred by the Area Commissioner, the ICD or Provincial Commissioner.

9. SUMMARY

Service-related complaints are received daily at police stations. The procedure followed in dealing with such complaints is not uniform; it differs in terms of the register used, the approach applied in solving complaints, the manner in which the complaints are handled and also the criteria used to categorise complaints. Standing Order 101 is not applied in all complaints and in some cases it is not even known. Complaints are reported to irrelevant structures because members of the public do not even know the right procedure to be followed when reporting a complaint. This is because of the fact that there is no information that advises the public on how and where to report their complaint. Hence, in other stations reliance is placed on either the CPF or local media to inform the public about the procedure on reporting complaints about the police.

10. RECOMMENDATIONS.

The ICD is of the strong opinion that the recommendations herein offer a real possibility of improving police-community relations. It is also the Department’s firm belief that the implementation of the recommendations hereunder would keep the police management abreast of any real or apparent public dissatisfaction about particular police members, units or stations. On that basis, the ICD makes the following recommendations:

10.1 That the SAPS should nationally introduce a uniform register wherein all service-related and/or interpersonal complaints by members of the public against a member/s of the Service are fully recorded.

10.2 That every police station and every specialised unit of the SAPS should keep and maintain such a register.

10.3 That every complaint (including those associated with departmental or criminal charges) should be recorded in the register and be dealt with verbally.

10.4 That an officer who deputises the Station Commissioner or alternatively, an officer designated by the Station Commissioner should keep and maintain the register.

10.5 That the register should make provision for, inter alia, the following:

  1. A complaint or reference number;
  2. A brief description of the nature or essence of a complaint;
  3. Full particulars (as they appear in the ID, Driver’s License or Passport) and address of the complainant as well as his/her identity number unless the complainant chooses to remain anonymous;
  4. Acknowledgement by the Station Commissioner that he/she has noted the complaint as it appears in the register with an indication as to the date and time that he/she noted said complaint;
  5. The names, rank and service number of the member who recorded said complaint;
  6. Date and time when a complaint was recorded;
  7. Provision for an ICD/Secretariat official to acknowledge that he/she has noted the complaint as set out in the register;
  8. A brief recording of steps taken to address the complaint and the results thereof as well as provision for the Station Commissioner to initial/sign his/her approval or ratification of the manner in which the complaint has been dealt with.

10.6 That a section be established in every police station to handle/deal with complaints by members of the public.

10.7 That a conspicuous notice (in at least three of the predominant official languages) be placed in every Community Service Centre informing the public of their rights to lodge complaints, if any, with the relevant section. In addition, Officers at the service counter be obliged, as a general rule, to inform the public of their rights to lodge complaints, if any, about service delivery or treatment by members of the Service.

10.8 That weekly, a Station Commissioner should peruse the register, note the complaints by appending his/her signature and where a complaint has not been properly addressed, give (in writing on the register) directives as to further action thereon.

10.9 That once the matter has been properly addressed, the Station Commissioner should initial his/her approval of the manner in which the complaint has been addressed.

10.10 That monthly, the Station Commissioner should compile statistics showing the number and nature of complaints received, how they have been addressed and an indication as to what the majority of the problems are and what his/her future plans are in dealing with the predominant problems.

10.11 That the Station Commissioner avail the register and monthly statistics to members of the ICD/Secretariat/Inspector-General’s office as and when requested and allow them to make copies thereof.

10.12 That the section dealing with the complaints operate on a 24-hour basis, be separate from the Community Service Centre and ensure adequate privacy and obviate intimidation.

10.13 That the Station Commissioner designate specific members to deal with complaints by members of the public and to record such complaints in the register.

10.14 That a member of the public who lodges a complaint be issued with an acknowledgement slip that shows that he/she has lodged a complaint as well as a reference number; date on which the complaint was lodged, the nature of the complaint; particular police station; name, signature and service number of the member who recorded the complaint.

10.15 That as a general rule, the following persons be allowed access to the register and statistics at their request:

  1. Office of the Inspector-General
  2. Members of the ICD
  3. The Secretariat for Safety and Security
  4. MEC for Safety and Liaison of the relevant province;
  5. Members of the National and Provincial Portfolio Committee on Safety and Safety and Security and Liaison respectively; and
  6. Members of Local Government structures.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~