Changes for the use of deadly force by police in South Africa

The South African Law Reform Commission (SALRC) wants to tighten measures around the use of deadly force by police, but experts warn that this could have serious consequences.

The SALRC is reviewing Section 49(2)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which governs police officers’ use of deadly force.

Among the four proposed amendments open for public comment, one focuses on tightening measures regarding how and when officers can use lethal force—a move that has sparked debate.

Speaking to 702, The SALRC Commissioner JB Skosana said that this amendment is part of a broader reform of the Criminal Procedure Act, which has been in place since 1973. 

He noted the commission was tasked with reviewing the law by the Minister of Justice, leading to the publication of discussion papers open for public engagement.

Under the proposed amendment, police officers would only be permitted to use deadly force if the suspect poses an immediate threat to the life of the arresting officer or another person or if there is an immediate threat of grievous bodily harm. 

Skosana explained that this differs from the current law, which allows deadly force if there is a threat of serious violence to the arrestor or others.

“The proposed change makes it clear that deadly force can only be used when an officer reasonably believes that their life, or the life of another person, is in immediate danger,” Skosana said. 

Skosana added that it’s not just about a general threat of violence—it must be an imminent and direct danger.

The proposed amendment has sparked debate, particularly among law enforcement and crime experts.

Police officials argue that the change could further expose officers to danger, especially in a country where violent crime is prevalent, and criminals are often armed. 

The Minister of Police recently highlighted the rising issue of illegal firearms, reinforcing concerns from officers that stricter limitations on deadly force may make criminals more confident.

Crime expert Chad Thomas warns that the proposed amendments to the Criminal Procedure Act could put police officers at greater risk and weaken their ability to combat violent crime.

He argues that the Act, despite being enacted in 1977, is not outdated and aligns well with democratic principles. However, restrictive policies may cause officers to hesitate in life-threatening situations.

Thomas recalls that past amendments in the late 1990s and early 2000s led to confusion among police, making them wary of using force even when necessary.

He stresses that hesitation in high-risk encounters—such as cash-in-transit heists, ATM bombings, and contract killings—could have deadly consequences.

Criminals in South Africa, he warns, are heavily armed and prepared for confrontation. If officers fear legal repercussions for using force, their ability to respond effectively will be compromised.

Thomas stressed that he could ultimately embolden criminals and put both police and the public at greater risk.

However, Skosana pointed out the need to balance this concern with constitutional rights. “The Constitution protects the right to life, and South Africa has abolished the death penalty. 

“The concern is that if the use of deadly force is too loosely regulated, we risk allowing extrajudicial killings by police,” he said.

The commission is gathering input from all stakeholders, including law enforcement, legal experts, and civil society, to ensure the final proposal strikes the right balance between upholding the law and protecting the rights of officers and civilians.

“This is a complex issue,” Skosana said. “We must consider both the safety of police officers on the front lines of crime and the constitutional principles that guide our justice system. 

“The final decision will be informed by public feedback, legal analysis, and comparative research,” he added. 

The proposed changes remain open for discussion as the Law Reform Commission continues its consultation process.