PRIVATE SECURITY UNDER FIRE: ANALYSING THE 2025 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE PRIVATE SECURITY INDUSTRY REGULATIONS ACT
On 28 March 2025, the Department of Police published proposed amendments to the Private Security Industry Regulations Act 56 of 2001. The proposed amendments, outlined in Government Gazette 52388, intend to impose stricter licensing requirements, increased oversight and significant changes to how private security companies operate. Yet, in a country so dependent on the efficiency of the private security sector, concerns have been raised that these proposed amendments (if implemented) could have potentially devastating consequences.
In terms of these proposed amendments, private security officers will be required to satisfy more stringent qualification criteria, inclusive of periodic assessments and rigorous background checks. This will include mandatory annual assessments, evaluating securities officers’ visual, neurological and emotional conditions. Moreover, the amendments propose restricting the use of semi-automatic rifles, with the effect of limiting security personnel to lower-caliber firearms. A reduction in ammunition allocation has also been proposed, limiting it to a “reasonable quantity”. Controversially, the amendments proposed that all firearms used by security officers are to be fitted with tracking devices. Whilst it can be argued that this is aimed at preventing firearm theft and misuse, it also opens the doors for increased vulnerability, as it could make response teams easier to monitor.
Additionally, handcuffs have been classified as weapons, requiring security personnel to obtain authorisation to use and carry them. The amendments also restrict other tools, such as tasers, water cannons and rubber bullets, which are now required to be approved 7 days prior to use. This raises concerns as to how security officers will be able to detain suspects and limit threats whilst awaiting law enforcement intervention. With the SAPS facing capacity challenges, the private security industry often acts as the de facto frontline of protection in high-crime areas, and restricting their access and ability to use ‘weapons’ may reduce their deterrent effect and slow emergency response times.
The government has attempted to justify these proposals on the grounds of improving accountability and preventing firearms from being lost, stolen or misused, yet, these proposed amendments raise serious concerns about the safety of ordinary citizens. South Africa already has one of the highest crime rates in the world, with many communities relying on private security due to the limitations of SAPS.
Whilst firearm regulation is undeniably necessary, placing excessive restrictions on private security, without simultaneously strengthening the capacity of public policing, could inadvertently increase the safety risks already faced by ordinary South Africans. It is essential to note that these proposed amendments are not yet in effect but are rather open for public comment. This period will hopefully allow the necessary opportunity for stakeholders to provide feedback on the implications of these proposed changes, enabling security professionals, business owners and civil society as a whole, to play a role in shaping the future safety of the Republic.
Written by Alexis van Eeghem
We trust that you found this article informative, please email info@hjwattorneys.co.za for assistance with all your legal queries.
This article is provided for informational purposes only and should not be substituted for legal advice on any specific matter. Any opinions expressed herein are subject to the law as at the time of writing and will change in accordance with any change in the law. We recommend that you contact HJW Attorneys & Conveyancers at info@hjwattorneys.co.za directly for advice applicable to your specific matter.