The Johannesburg Labour Court would on Friday rule whether police service members could join the public-service strike.
During arguments on Thursday, lawyers for police and the Police and Prisons Civil Rights Union (Popcru) spent much time arguing which categories of South African Police Services (SAPS) employees were essential and which not.
Lawyer for the SAPS Paul Kennedy submitted that both SAPS staff in uniform and those performing support and administrative functions were precluded from striking by legislation. Both were equally vital to the smooth functioning of the service.
”There can be no doubt that if support personnel go on strike it would seriously compromise the services of the SAPS,” said Kennedy.
Popcru lawyer Peter Buirski said it would be possible to distinguish non-essential from essential SAPS staff.
Kennedy, however, said this would be ”highly complex, difficult and confusing”.
Buirski countered: ”There’s no way one can argue that a gardener in the SAPS is someone who performs an essential service.”
Kennedy said Popcru risked a R500 000 fine, or 30 days’ imprisonment, for contempt of court after allegedly violating an interim court order granted late last Friday. There was prima facie evidence Popcru had done so, he said. The order prevented SAPS members from striking and Popcru from encouraging its members to do so. It also instructed the union to communicate its contents to members in writing.
The next day Popcru national spokesperson Pat Ntsobi issued a statement, quoted in the Pretoria News, saying ” … we are going to carry on preparations for a strike”.
Kennedy said Ntsobi ”conspicuously omitted” to mention the order in his statement.
”It is at very best a half-truth which is very dangerous and misleading,” said Kennedy.
Judge AJ Ngalwana asked whether it was possible that Ntsobi was not aware of the court order. Popcru lawyer Peter Buirski said this was the case.
Buirski added that the alleged breach of the court order was not that serious since it did not lead to a strike.
”There’s been no strike … we haven’t even heard that there are demonstrations.”
Kennedy said Popcru would be given at least two weeks to put forward its evidence on the matter in an answering affidavit.
”We are not asking for summary committal for contempt. We are asking for a rule nisi to be issued that at least indicates that the case has to be answered.
A rule nisi is a ruling by a court that does not have any force until such time that a particular condition is met.
After more than two hours of arguments, Popcru members in the public gallery began squirming in their seats when lawyers turned to semantics. Buirski argued that support and administrative staff were ”employed” in the service, but not ”engaged”, making them non-essential.
”All support personnel are equally engaged in the SAPS,” countered Kennedy.
According to Kennedy, there were 163 000 SAPS employees. Of these 130 000 were police officers engaged under the SAPS Act. The rest were support staff employed under the Public Services Act.
Traffic, police and correctional services officers made up Popcru’s estimated 120 000 members. The Correctional Services Department was not involved in the Labour Court matter.
Judge Ngalwana reserved judgement on Thursday evening. – Sapa