*Cde Gugu's article is published in today's Times, on page 19, which is the "op-ed" page and is called "The Big Read".** * *The Times has put the headline: "Down with the gunslingers!", and given it a picture. * * * *Well done, Cde Gugu!* * * *If you don't get The Times, you can read Gugu's article as printed at:* * * *http://www.timeslive.co.za/opinion/article133512.ece*<http://www.timeslive.co.za/opinion/article133512.ece> * * *Viva YCL, Viva!* * * * * *VC* * * * * * * * * * *
2009/9/30 morgan phaahla <[email protected]> > Well said, cadre! > > Sometimes I get worried when I receive responses from comrades throwing the > debate out of the window in order to chastise one another. I made a plea > earlier in the forum that it pains me when we throw labels at each other in > our quest to justify our point of views or difference on a debate. This has > become a recurring problem which reached alarming proportions. It's > absolutely unnecessary! > > Let's debate, and agree to disagree. > > Back on the debate introduced by cde Gugu, I agree with her on some aspects > however we need to look at the gravity of the matter. The issue is not > "shoot to kill-death sentence without trial" as presented by cde Gugu but > shoot to kill in dangerous situations. > > We cannot be complacent about the severity of crime in this country. Why > worry about someone who resort to crime for living and shoot to kill whoever > attempts to stop him/her. We cannot live under a threat of criminals. Shoot > to kill policy is nothing else but a deterrent strategy and section 49 of > the Criminal Procedure Act is a mechanism to allow the police officer to > shoot in dangerous situations. This is not an absolute right to shoot at > will. > > The issue at stake here is that every year SAPS officers are gunned down in > a warfare with criminal gangs. And no one cares about the impact of on-duty > killings in the SAPS on spouses and children of deceased officers. Is it > right for poorly paid officers to be killed by criminals in the line of duty > but wrong for criminals to be killed in a shoot-out with police officers? > > In fact, it costs the state millions of rands in compensation of on-duty > killings in the SAPS and while costing the country billions in business > robberies. Despite all of this, police are expected to combat crime and > fight heavily armed criminals with no regard for human life. > > I submit therefore that there is nothing wrong with the law but its > application which can be evaluated and monitored to make sure it does not > get abused. The section 49 of the Criminal Procedure Act, is a good step in > the right direction. The merits and demerits of this law are issues more > related to capacity than principles. > > Let Minister of Police and the Independent Complaints Directorate be > measured on the success rate of law than dismissing it altogether to nurse > interests of criminals. The police must shoot to kill to protect everyone > and to reduce the high level of crime ravaging the country on a daily > basis. > > Let's debate, comrades! > > Remain > Morgan Phaahla > Ekurhuleni > > > "Sometimes, if you wear suits for too long, it changes your ideology." - > Joe Slovo > > --- On *Wed, 9/30/09, sabelo gina <[email protected]>* wrote: > > > From: sabelo gina <[email protected]> > Subject: [YCLSA Discussion] Re: Shoot to kill-death sentence without trial > To: [email protected] > Date: Wednesday, September 30, 2009, 6:20 AM > > > Comrades, > > Over the weekend I read the newspaper article on this matter that was > talking about a section that is vague in the Act, which confuses police when > faced with danger of an armed fleeing criminal. Can we reflect on that in > the light of what police face and the number of deaths that have happened in > our country both of police and ordinary citizens in the hands of the armed > criminals. The moderator must get us that article here in the forum then we > engage. > > There is also a constitutional decision on the matter, can we use the same > constitution that we were using few weeks ago in defence of the unionisation > in the army to argue this point rather than this style from all of you > including Dominic.It is a known fact that when I present my personal views, > I must say so. > > Let us engage! > > Cedric > > On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 8:56 AM, Gugu Ndima > <[email protected]<http://us.mc502.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> > > wrote: > >> *Shoot to kill-death sentence without trial* >> > Having grown up in a township where young boys and girls yearned for role > models to give them direction; a place where inadequacies of education > illustrated themselves in our communities more especially in January where > matriculants now wonder what’s next for them, has made me understand the > causations of crime within our society. A place where hope of alleviating > poverty, is still a myth. Unfortunately choices and options that avail > themselves to people that are subjected to such social ills have horrendous > pathways that tend to end one’s life or lead them to the cold corridors of > South African prisons. For most women the alternatives are inclusive of > options such as prostitution, shop-lifting and gambling in township games > known as “U-Mchina” or cards. Some have found minimal salvation in grant > money and subject themselves to retail exploitation in stores such as > Shoprite which have found a magnificent and loyal market in our townships > despite their disgusting service to our people. > > These are some of the social ills that still characterise urban poverty; > poverty that is mostly over looked, due to the illusion that poverty is > minimal in areas of urbanisation. Unfortunately such areas are those that > are more susceptible to it (poverty) and it’s increasing as a result of the > perpetual divisions between the rich and the poor. These divisions have > become more ailing due to the fact that they are now class divisions between > the black elite and the poor black majority. > > When South Africans went to the polling stations for the first democratic > elections in 1994, they voted with the hope that the transformation of > government would yield economic and political relief and moreover bring the > promise land to the masses in the form of a better life. Most saw this as a > new beginning for them and the newly elected government would by default be > a government that would be more sympathetic and understanding towards the > conditions that still terrorise the black majority of this country; until > today, the masses still loyally vote for the liberation movement as options > are non-existent in real terms in South Africa. It becomes a sad case when > the very same government now unilaterally decides to set a blind eye on the > conditions that ail the poor and opt to use military methods to deal with > problems in our society. > > When I first heard the utterance “shoot to kill” by Commissioner Bheki > Cele, I could not help but question the logic or obscure ideological > connotation from which this mentality stems from. This route or manner of > approach for addressing crime manifests lawlessness and violence amongst the > people. It potentially has the element of destruction in society as this > will encourage retaliation or retribution from those that will fight against > the abuse of this “shoot to kill” tactic by the police force. In the place > of respect, fear will emerge from the members of our society. It’s blatantly > clear that such statements are pre-mature and cannot be condoned. The > justification that was mumbled by the Police ministry brigade for this > “shoot to kill” tactic was that it’s the best form of method to deal with > thugs that choose to execute cops in a gun-battle. Now unfortunately you > cannot implement such a law in South Africa due the short-comings of the > whole SAPS. For one corruption in the SAPS is horrifically the major > characteristics of the force, most people that join the force tend to buy > their way in through bribery. Secondly skills are serious concern within the > SAPS and sometimes it’s embarrassing that you find police officers that > cannot even properly draft an affidavit let alone an official statement. > Thirdly we have officers that tend to think by virtue of their uniform they > are above the law. > > The abuse hawkers, commuters in roadblocks, they take bribes as opposed to > dealing with cases. They abuse civilians in holding cells, the SAPS has been > implicated in numerous cases where prostitutes were held in holding cells > and raped by men in blue; deaths under police custody have increased. Lest > we forget that organised crime cases tend to have the men in blue implicated > highly. Now we ask where does the shoot to kill fit in from the above, well > for any police officer that could potentially be implicated in the above can > easily utilise the “shoot to kill” tact to get rid of evidence. The > Independent Complaints Directorate has recently complaint that it has > limited powers to deal with complaints bought against police officers in our > country. We can’t have a police force that will be a law unto themselves. > Yes there is a serious crime issue but unfortunately we cannot look at crime > unilaterally without simultaneously addressing the causations. The SAPS has > no clear transformation policy in place and racism is still an issue. We > have a serious influx of foreigners for example, but that is no lee-way for > police officers to abuse them as they please and this is exactly what is > happening around the country; at the rate the Police ministry is going with > the whole shoot to kill debacle, you would swear that there is a new award > for the number of body bags that police officers bring in. > > The amendment of section 49 will not resolve anything instead it will > create animosity between civilians and police officers. Let’s first achieve > an environment that will curb young people from resorting to violent crimes. > Some of the men that have resorted to such criminal activities, are men that > strongly defended the revolution during trying times in the early nineties > unfortunately the government has never had a plan in place to absorb them. > They sacrificed their education in order to see political emancipation and > now they have become statistics within our prisons or are buried by the > bullet of the SAPS. This whole debacle reminds me of a sad story in the > township where a Fidelity guard was parked outside a petrol station, due to > the inadequate recreational activities that are minimal in the township, > young children play in the street. A young girl mistakenly rolled her tennis > ball under the van as she ran to go get it quickly, she was greeted with a > rain of bullets and until today the family never got compensation for that. > Now this is just Fidelity, a private security company, what more if law > enforcers have been given a blank cheque to murder people equally just like > criminals. A well-trained officer of the law will know exactly when to shoot > and does not need the law to be amended for that. We have worked hard to > eradicate injustice in our country and the process of transforming the law > is far from over. Introducing a new form of death sentence will just take us > back to the dark years of apartheid, the difference will now be that this > will be sanctioned by our very own people. > Phansi with the amendment of Section 49 phansi!! > I remain Gugu Ndima > National spokesperson (YCLSA) > 076 783 1516 > > > > > > > > > -- Blog at: http://domza.blogspot.com/ Communist University web site at: http://amadlandawonye.wikispaces.com/ Subscribe for free e-mail updates at: http://groups.google.com/group/Communist-University/ Library of documents (CU "CD") at: http://cu.domza.net/ [email protected] --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You are subscribed. This footer can help you. Please POST your comments to [email protected] or reply to this message. You can visit the group WEB SITE at http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery options, pages, files and membership. To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email [email protected] . You don't have to put anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put anything in the message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this address (repeat): [email protected] . -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
