/ 13 August 2007

SAPS-fuelled rape rhetoric

Amid the top-level dialogue, public debate and opulent functions dedicated to solving the scourge of violence against women and children, is it possible that we are losing sight of the obvious? Could we be suffering from the “bullshit baffles brains” syndrome instead of allowing common sense and reason to prevail?

Community mistrust of the South African Police Service (SAPS) leads to a reluctance to report and criminals are — passively — protected. With fewer arrests and convictions, potential criminals are encouraged to commit crimes. Community support for the SAPS would result in increased reporting of crime and whistleblowing on criminal activity. In turn, we would see more arrests and convictions. Potential criminals would find this a deterrent. Simplistic, but true.

Last month, at a victim empowerment summit (ironically), a senior SAPS superintendent in the presence of at least 20 of his peers and subordinates said that the police could not be expected to open a case “for every woman who claims she has been raped because we must first make sure she isn’t lying”.

Evidently, there is an urgent need to re-educate police officers, who have contact with the public. Like many other government officials, they are exploiting the naiveté of rural people by studiously ignoring both the Batho Pele and victim empowerment principles, as well as their own in-house regulations.

Paradoxically, so much could be achieved if they would just implement existing principles and policies, but this would require a concerted effort, backed by a commitment from the top level, that goes well beyond the current rhetoric.

If the SAPS decision-makers would just do some honest soul-searching, they would realise that “rotten apples” exist in every organisation and the SAPS is no exception. We must accept this, just as we acknowledge that the majority of police officers are inherently well intentioned.

What is unacceptable, however, is the way the SAPS reacts when the misfits among them are exposed. Instead of holding them to account and taking appropriate disciplinary action, they invariably close ranks to protect them — even when confronted with irrefutable evidence of their misconduct.

The individual or organisation that lodges the complaint, on the other hand, is immediately vilified and labelled a troublemaker. Should the case attract enough attention, a spokesperson is rolled out in an embarrassing public attempt to defend the indefensible. Obviously, the result of this misplaced loyalty is that all police, both good and bad, are tarred with the same brush — and community mistrust is intensified.

If, on the other hand, they were to admit when something goes wrong and apply a transparent, “zero tolerance” attitude towards offending police officers, they would earn community trust, which is so pivotal in combating crime.

The same applies to strategies or policies that have either failed or are being abused. The SAPS and non-profit organisations have been conducting “break-the-silence” campaigns for a few years now, in recognition of the fact that only a small percentage of rape victims report the incident. Logically, therefore, one would expect the numbers for reported rape statistics to increase in direct proportion to the success of the campaigns.

Simultaneously, however, the SAPS are so determined to reduce the statistics by a minimum of 7% that they have put the onus on their members to suppress the very reporting of rape cases.

Shockingly, there is strong evidence that many have interpreted this policy to mean: “Do everything possible to discourage the opening of cases” — and they believe that by doing so they will earn promotions. In some instances, the victim and accused are even called in to the police station so that a financial settlement can be negotiated.

In recent years, the police in one district received a platinum award for “reducing rape by 11%”, supposedly by conducting a few campaigns with a local church. Although this claim was not substantiated by official statistics, one has to wonder, are they professing to have reduced the incidence of rape or merely the reporting thereof? And do they really care which it is, so long as their statistics look good? Apparently not.

Victim empowerment organisations throughout the country are generally mute because they are controlled by police officers and social workers, wholly reliant on government for their funding, and perform no oversight function. So how are you to know exactly what is going on?

Fiona Nicholson is programme director of the Thohoyandou Victim Empowerment Programme