Sakeliga opposes draft amendments to PSIRA regulations

• The ‘Draft Amendments to the Private Security Industry Regulations' are neither in the public interest nor in the interest of private security operators.
• The draft amendments published in the Government Gazette by the Minister of Police in March 2025 would undermine public safety and destabilise private security operations in a high-crime country where the security industry provides vital security services not provided by an inadequate police service.
• Sakeliga opposes the draft amendments in their entirety and has informed PSIRA accordingly.

Introduction

The ‘Draft Amendments to the Private Security Industry Regulations’ published in the Government Gazette on March 28, 2025, are neither in the public interest nor in the interest of the private security operators and should be withdrawn in their entirety.

The draft amendments were facilitated by Minister of Police, Senzo Mchunu, after consultation with the Council of the Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority (PSIRA).

The proposals would place extremely onerous constraints on  private security operators, undermining their effective functioning. This stands in direct contradiction to the stated objectives of PSIRA. The amendments would also erode confidence in safety and security in the country, a key foundation for economic activity and investment planning.

Sakeliga opposes the Draft Amendments and has submitted comprehensive written comments in this regard.

Key Problematic Elements of the Draft Amendments

If passed, these amendments would among other things:

• Prohibit the issuance of firearms even where a security firm and/or security officer is simply under investigation for an alleged offence or violation.
• Prohibit private security officers from carrying firearms in public spaces such as schools, shopping malls, taxi ranks, hospitals and stadiums unless specific requirements are complied with.
• Leave many private security officers without sufficient means to protect themselves, their clients, and/or the public from violent assaults by criminals.
• Classify handcuffs as a weapon rather than a restraining measure.
• Limit the ammunition provided to private security officers to a "reasonable quantity" - a term that remains undefined in the Draft Amendments.
• Prohibit security service providers from using any weapons (in the rendering of security services) that could harm civilians. This includes tasers, tear gas, rubber bullets, and other non-lethal options.
• Restrict the use of semi-automatic rifles by private security officers to only three scenarios: protection of valuables being transported, protection at critical infrastructure, or anti-poaching services.
• Require every security business to install a tracking device in every firearm, with installation only by PSIRA-approved providers, despite questions about technology availability and cost feasibility.
• Impose a financially crippling burden on private security companies – as they would be required to carry the cost of additional annual medical, psychological, and psychiatric evaluations of the officers in their employ.
• Require private security companies to submit an application to PSIRA, 7 days prior to the intended use of any prohibited weapon (e.g. rubber bullets), despite the spontaneous and unpredictable nature of security work.

In a recent press release dated April 11, 2025, PSIRA states that these amendments are designed to strengthen compliance and oversight within the private security industry.

However, by imposing disproportionate constraints, the proposed amendments jeopardise the effectiveness of operators in the private security industry—a sector that plays an indispensable role in maintaining safety in both public and private sectors.

This poses a clear threat to public safety as well as to productive social and economic activity in South Africa.

Sakeliga’s Position

The draft regulations should be withdrawn in their entirety.

Any such regulations would need to be proportionate and reasonable.

However, these draft amendments can neither be deemed to be proportionate nor reasonable – especially considering the detrimental effect they would have on private security companies, their employees, and general public safety.

You can read Sakeliga’s full submission to the office of the Director of Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority on this matter here.