AfriForum has filed a complaint regarding the Northern Cape SAPS' "English only" order.
Image: File picture
AFRIFORUM has taken a firm stand against the recent directive issued by the Northern Cape South African Police Service (SAPS), which mandates that all official communication and statements be written exclusively in English. The civil rights organisation filed a complaint with the Pan South African Language Board (PanSALB) this week, citing concerns over language rights and constitutional violations.
The controversy arose after a letter from Major-General Luntu Ngubelanga, the Northern Cape deputy provincial commissioner, surfaced. The letter instructs that, effective immediately, all SAPS documentation in the province must be conducted solely in English. The decision has sparked widespread criticism, particularly given that the Constitution of South Africa guarantees the right to use multiple official languages.
Alana Bailey, AfriForum’s head of Cultural Affairs, expressed her dismay at the directive, highlighting the “irony” of the deputy provincial commissioner citing the Constitution to justify the order. According to Bailey, the very section referenced in the directive underscores the importance of linguistic diversity rather than enforcing a single-language policy.
“This directive ignores a critical settlement reached in the Northern Cape High Court in 2017, which overturned a similar order issued in 2016. It is unacceptable that SAPS leadership is either unaware of this ruling or chooses to disregard it,” Bailey stated.
Concerns about the impact of such a policy on the justice system were also raised at a recent linguistic human rights conference hosted by PanSALB at the University of the Witwatersrand on March 12. During the conference, various cases were highlighted where police statements taken in English - by officers whose first language was not English - resulted in factual inaccuracies, ultimately undermining justice.
Bailey further criticised the directive’s expectation that SAPS members themselves act as translators and interpreters. “Translation and interpretation require professional expertise. Forcing officers to perform these duties without proper training not only places undue pressure on them but also denies the public, particularly victims of crime, the dignity and fair treatment they deserve,” she explained.
AfriForum argues that the best practice would be for SAPS members to serve the public in their preferred language. If this is not possible at a particular station, the next logical step should be to employ the services of professional translators or interpreters.
In addition to filing the complaint with PanSALB, AfriForum has announced plans to explore further legal action. The organisation is expected to collaborate with Solidarity and the Cape Forum in challenging the directive.
The SAPS in the Northern Cape has confirmed that the instruction was indeed issued by the deputy provincial commissioner for Crime Detection. However, according to SAPS spokesperson Brigadier Mashay Gamieldien, the matter has since been reviewed internally to avoid further misunderstanding and misinterpretation.
The SAPS has provided clarity regarding its language policy and the directive in question. The official Provincial Directive 3 of 2017 states:
“The Provincial Directive 3 of 2017 is not intended to supplement or supersede the South African Police Service Policy 1 of 2016 on the use of official languages in the SAPS published in Government Gazette No. 39782 Government Notice 228 dated 8 March 2016.
The purpose of the above-mentioned Provincial Directive 3 of 2017 is to provide understanding on the use of the preferred working language of the police to members in the Northern Cape.
“The Provincial Directive is thus intended to be elementary, and in all cases of doubt, members should approach and seek guidance from Language Policy 1 of 2016 as stated above.
“The Provincial Directive recognises that there are diverse official languages within the province and within the rank and file of the SAPS. The Provincial Directive also recognises that there are diverse and dynamic communities in the Northern Cape.
“Nothing must be allowed to stand in the way of giving proper police service to all communities simply because of a language barrier.
“Therefore, for internal purposes, SAPS members are urged to use the preferred working language of the Northern Cape, which is plain English (see paragraph 8(1)(a) of Policy 1 of 2016).
“SAPS members are duty-bound and expected to be proficient in the use of the preferred working language of the SAPS when busy with the business of the South African Police Service.
“It is also the duty of every member to recognise that every suspect, accused person, witness, and victim has the right to use the official language of his/her own choice when he/she comes to the police for service or assistance on any matter.
“SAPS members shall inform the client to use his/her language of choice without causing unreasonable delay and inconvenience to the client concerned because the member does not understand the language of choice.”
As the controversy unfolds, SAPS has yet to issue further details regarding any potential policy adjustments. Their perspective on the directive and its future implementation will be crucial in determining the next steps in this developing matter.
Related Topics: