The Good Party in Drakenstein recently voiced its opposition to the Drakenstein Municipality’s (DM) procurement of firearms under the revised Firearms Control Act of 2000. The party described the move as “reckless and unlawful,” alleging that the DM is not in compliance with the legislation as amended in 2000, following the lapse of the 1998 Act.
GOOD argues that following the lapse of the Firearms Control Act of 1998 and the introduction of the revised legislation in 2000 which granted municipalities across the country, including DM a five-year grace period to ensure that all firearms in their possession used by law enforcement officials, were legally held, was never properly adhered to.
Therefore, Good says in a statement released on 13 June “the DM has continued to unlawfully possess an arsenal of weapons, for 21 years, in breach of Schedule 1 of the Act, which required non-recognised institutions to surrender such firearms to the South African Police Services (Saps).”
“Section 98 of the Firearms Control Act, 2000 is explicit – a government department may only acquire, possess or use firearms or ammunition if authorised to do so by the National Commissioner. There are only two ways for such authorisation to be granted: recognition as an official institution by the Registrar or express written consent from the Commissioner. Drakenstein has neither.”
The DM, however, refutes Good’s position.
“The allegation that [the DM] is in possession of illegal firearms is deprived of any truth and aims to bring the municipality in disrepute, which is regrettable.
“Misinformation spread in this regard is not only reckless but also very irresponsible.The municipality is authorised by the Saps to be in possession of firearms and ammunition in terms of the law, and firearms and managed in line with prevailing rules and legislation,” Saul Jacobs, DM’s manager of law enforcement and security said.
Keagen Gerste, Good councillor in Drakenstein and caucus whip, stated that the party is also concerned about a recent tender advertised for the supply and delivery of various firearms to the municipality.
He emphasised that such procurement is not permitted if the municipality is not recognised as an official institution authorised to possess firearms under the 2000 Firearms Control Act.
“Despite not yet being recognised as an official institution licensed to own or carry firearms, DM proceeded to issue and award tender PS 3/2024 for the supply and delivery of various firearms. This was confirmed by MMC Avron Appollis during the May sitting of the Council, where he stated that the Municipality is “legally in the clear” because the weapons are for “training purposes only,”” the Good Party said in a statement on 10 June.
The Paarl Post reached out to the ANC and Concerned Drakenstein Residents (CDR) political parties within the Drakenstein Municipality, both of whom indicated that they were unable to comment due to insufficient knowledge on the matter.
Stephan Landsberg, VF-Plus ward councillor within Wellington said that his party is of the opinion that the DM is, in fact, acting within their rights to own firearms as well as to advertise a tender for the for the supply and delivery of firearms.
To substantiate his claims, Landsberg provided documentation which stipulates that the DM is recognised as an official institution under the Firearms Control Act of 2000.
The Paarl Post reached out to DM for additional questions, including how law enforcement officials will be trained to use firearms, as well as where it will be stored. Their feedback will be added once received.
