GSSC

The controversy surrounding the Fire Arms act since its implementation developed gradually amongst the fire arm owners mainly due to the day to day practical problems fire arm owners and prospective owners experienced when fire arms were purchased and licenses had to be issued. The controversy turned into conflict with low intensity and eventually evolved to a point where SAHGCA took the matter to court in an attempt to protect members [and all other legal fire arm owners] against the onslaught from the Central Fire Arms Register. These events had a dramatic effect on hunters and sport shooters hence the initiative taken by SAHGCA on this matter. The situation on the court case has now reached a stage where it is necessary to inform members what the status is. Covering the process as it is relevant to the court case, the main events are described in phases.

First phase
As the conflict between the fire arm owners and the applicators of the law, the Central Fire Arm Register [CFR] grew, SAHGCA started to consider the options and what was needed to handle the interests of its members. As part of the hunters’ fraternity the Association shared a common platform with other Associations in the Hunters’ Forum. In spite of this sharing, for the most part, no common approach existed amongst the various role players as to how the situation should be dealt with relative to the CFR. SAHGCA for its part, spent many hours making suggestions, proposals and offered solutions to the CFR in an attempt to improve the situation but with no avail.

The deadline for the final implementation of the act namely the last day for the transitional arrangements to be intact namely June 30, 2009 was nearing and a continued deterioration of the administration of license applications, made SAHGCA to decided the only way to protect the interests of its members and coincidently all the fire arm owners in South Africa, was to revert to legal action. This action was decided upon in spite of very limited support from other hunting associations with exception of PHASA.

The submission to the court was based on the criminalization of legal fire arm owners to whom the SAPS most likely would be unable to issue new licenses on June 30, 2009 secondly, the question of ownership and lastly, the administrative disorder that prevailed with the processing and issuing of fire arm licenses. The case was heard in front of the high court with the Minister of Police as the Defendant and on 24 June 2009 the court ruled in favour of SAHGCA with an interim order that fire arm licenses issued under previous legislation will remain valid pending a final hearing on March 29, 2010. This brought to a halt a period of major uncertainty and was to the benefit of every legal fire arm owner in South Africa whose legal ownership was threatened by the implementation of the Fire Arms Act, act 60 of 2000. This legal help provided by the court after SAHGCA took the initiative to litigate, was not only a helping hand for the members of the Association but all legal fire arm owners in the country. This brought to an end what can be termed as the first phase of this saga.

Second phase
During February 2010 SAHGCA was approached by the legal representative of the Minister of Police requesting discussions around the pending final hearing of the court case on March 29, 2010. SAHGCA agreed to a discussion. The parties assigned the task to the legal teams to identify what is required to be done to legislation, regulations and other administrative directives to embed the rights acquired through the interim court order. This should ensure the removal of criminalization, ownership deprival and administrative disorder. The condition was for the legal teams to report back to the two parties to agree on what had been identified and for SAHGCA not to lose its rights to be able to continue with the court case at any stage.
Towards the end of March 2010 the legal teams were able to find a solution for the criminalization but could not agree on how to deal with ownership issues and administrative disorder. This resulted in a deadlock as the legal team of the SAPS stated categorically that the administrative issues cannot be included as part of the discussions.

During this period the SAHGCA Executive Committee agreed to the postponement of the final hearing scheduled for 29 March 2010, to a later date. On this day the Executive Committee met with the SAHGCA legal team for a comprehensive report back. The crucial point that faced the EC at this stage was to decide whether the discussions should be cancelled and to proceed with the court case.
The two options were deliberated at length carefully considering the possible consequences. On the one hand it appeared to be best to proceed with the court case because the process can be anticipated and apart from the final decision by the court, it seemed more predictable. The option to continue with the negotiations was deemed to be more uncertain and based on the experience, not much had been achieved by talking with the SAPS. The Executive Committee evaluated the options based on what a positive court decision could bring for SAHGCA members and how long it would take to reach a final conclusion versus finding a solution through negotiations and thereby achieve a better overall dispensation by contributing the knowledge and experience of the hunting and sport shooting fraternity towards a solution.

At the end of March 2010, the Executive Committee decided to end the negotiations between the legal teams and instead to proceed with negotiations with the Secretariat of Police on the matter of administrative disorder and ownership issues. A basic understanding was reached between the parties about the standpoint held by SAHGCA and it was agreed to proceed with further discussions to find a way out of the deadlock. With this event phase two was ended.

Phase three
This phase was characterised by a shift of the negotiations to be between SAHGCA and the Secretariat of Police. Several meetings and discussions were held and eventually it was clear and accepted that not only was the administrative disorder fundamental to any solution and agreement, a number of other factors preventing the proper functioning of the licensing process such as the renewal of Competency Certificates should be attended as a matter of urgency. SAHGCA then proceeded to prepare a document covering the aspects reflecting the weaknesses in the process and the legislation which need to be dealt with to establish a situation that will offer workable licensing of fire arms for hunting and sport shooting.

The acceptance of the document by the Secretariat of Police as the basis whereby further work on the matter should be done was a significant moment and major break trough in the process of negotiation and an achievement on behalf of all legal fire arm owners in South Africa. The principles contained therein dealt with everything that frustrated fire arm owners and specifically hunters and sport shooters on licensing matters. Furthermore, it was accepted that the licensing process of fire arms had deteriorated to a stage where it was dysfunctional.

From this document followed the next step whereby the Minister of Police decided to appoint a task team consisting of individuals to investigate the total process of fire arm licensing, the omissions in the legislation and its application. The appointment of the members of the task team will be the prerogative of the Minister but will be experienced and skilled individuals able to effectively investigate the issues and to present its finding by the end of July 2010. The terms of reference of the task team to which SAHGCA made a significant contribution stipulates that the end result will not only present solutions but when and how these will be implemented. The terms of reference is not an itemised list of what should be dealt with but instead stipulates the areas that will be covered namely legislative, process, administrative and urgent issues.

It would appear that the Minister of Police decided on the necessity to attend to this matter because the issue was discussed at a ministerial Lekgotla and because of the influence of SAHGCA as a result of our continued negotiations and submissions to the Secretariat of Police.

It is obvious that this assignment by the task team will deal with a wide range of matters but will also provide solutions to the status of current license holders whose rights had been re-instated by the interim court order of June 24, 2009. The court order stipulates that licences granted under previous legislation will remain valid pending the final hearing scheduled for March 29, 2010. This court hearing was postponed and unless it is re-instated, it will also be a matter to be dealt with by the task team. In other words, holders of “Green Licenses” now deemed to be valid, be replaced with new licenses to be issued on a basis still to be defined.

The Minister of Police announced the task team on June 25, 2010 a day and a year after the interim court order was granted. The task team is:
i. Me Jenni Irish-Qobosheane (Chair) – Chief Executive Officer Civilian Secretariat for Police,
ii. Mr Amichand Soman – Director Legal Services, Civilian Secretariat for Police;
iii. Mr Mlungisi Menziwa – Director Policy and Research, Civilian Secretariat for Police;
iv. Mr Sam Mahote – Parliamentary liaison – Civil Secretariat for Police
v. Mr Mothupi Mafologela - Civilian Secretariat for Police;
vi. Me Annelizé van Wyk, MP, - member of the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Police
vii. Mr Billy Graham – Business Against Crime, and;
viii. Dr Herman Els – former chairman Hunters-SAPS Consultative Forum.

With the appointment of the task team and the commencement of their duties, the process has reached the end of phase three. SAHGCA is pleased to announce that this is as a result of the relentless and diligent efforts of the Association since the approach made by the SAPS during February 2010. The current position was not reached easily. Patience was required when the difficulties and often animosity towards legal fire arm owners arose during the Fire Arm Amnesty and the frustration of SAHGCA members who saw no progress with their applications on the one side and the requirement to remain rational in the decision making process on the other side. Statements about a “Gun Free” South Africa placed strain on the process on more than one occasion. SAHGCA also wish to express our thanks and appreciation towards PHASA for their support with the court case and the negotiations.

The saga is not over and the Association is eagerly awaiting the successful conclusion of the next phase. SAHGCA will remain diligent and guard over the process to ensure an outcome that will result in the removal of the difficulties that existed and the establishment of a dispensation that will provide for sensible and orderly fire arm licensing for its members and all hunters and sports shooters in SA.