Analysis of private security companies compliance to the private security industry’s regulatory framework in Gauteng, South Africa

Abstract

This study analysed the private security companies’ (PSCs) compliance to the private security industry (PSI) regulatory framework or the lack thereof, in the province of Gauteng, South Africa. The overarching rationale for the is to test the industry’s progress in professionalisation. The study focused on examining whether the PSCs register with the Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority (PSIRA) and complies with other requirements as stipulated in the Private Security Industry Regulatory Act. PSIRA is well positioned to effect control over the PSI. The question remains whether the Regulator is succeeding in its mandate to effect control over the security industry. The image of the PSI is not one seen in a positive light by the society. It is, therefore, incumbent of the Regulator to professionalise the PSI so that it gains legitimacy and approval. The researcher embarked on a process of investigating whether the PSC meets requisite or operating a security business by registering with PSIRA. The researcher followed a qualitative research approach to answer the research question whether PSCs are compliant or non-compliant. In line with qualitative approach, the research opted for the phenomenological methodological framework, which sought to obtain participants’ lived experience. The rationale for selecting this methodology to study this phenomenon was to decipher as much data, experience, knowledge and lived experience from the participants. Data were collected through research interviews with PSI experts and actors and other documentary sources such as PSIRA policies were also visited. In-depth semi-structured interviews were used to collect data from the research participants. The participants were carefully selected based on their experience and knowledge. Based on the participants responses, PSCs exist because of high demand of their service made available by the void created by failing police service to provide protection to the citizenry. Although their motive is mostly making profit, for some security businesspeople, it is a calling and some want to make a different – to stop crime. The PSI is riddled by non-complying PSCs because of varied reasons. Among others, PSCs join the industry for mischievous reasons, with some intending to acquire firearms. Some join the industry because it is lucrative and the entry level is quite low whereas some join because of opportunity for tendering. Many bypasses the regulations and operate illegally. It is therefore incumbent of the Regulator to come with interventions to eliminate non-compliance. Gauteng is highly affected owing to its economic status and the high crime level. The number of PSCs is highest in the country. The Regulator has the inspectorate and legal arm/division to ensure that noncompliant PSCs are identified, sanctioned and where possible prosecuted. Participants shared divergent views on whether PSIRA is successful in its role. Some see the Regulator managing well to bring non-compliance down whereas some view PSIRA’s efforts as insufficient. Some vow that they have never seen a single inspector in their business premises. Amid all the negativity against the Regulator, there is consensus among the participant that PSIRA is not adequately funded. Their funding model, which is primarily sourced from the registered companies and levies from security officers, is not adequate to enable the Regulator to deliver on its mandate. The Regulator keeps on improving in its operations. PSIRA has improved on its digitisations, which enables many more companies to register flawlessly and swiftly, and also making their services easily available.