Scribd
Upload
60K views15 pages

Challenges Within The CFR by Martin Hood 3 May 2023

The Central Firearms Registry is facing several challenges including a complete breakdown in communication with stakeholders, unilateral changes to policies without consultation, incorrect records, refusal to comply with court orders, failure to make timely decisions on applications, and a lack of electronic connectivity and transparency. Requests for information also go unanswered. There are concerns about overcharging by private advocates hired by the state.

Uploaded by

Matt
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
60K views15 pages

Challenges Within The CFR by Martin Hood 3 May 2023

The Central Firearms Registry is facing several challenges including a complete breakdown in communication with stakeholders, unilateral changes to policies without consultation, incorrect records, refusal to comply with court orders, failure to make timely decisions on applications, and a lack of electronic connectivity and transparency. Requests for information also go unanswered. There are concerns about overcharging by private advocates hired by the state.

Uploaded by

Matt
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 15

PRESENTATION TO THE

POLICE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE

CHALLENGES WITHIN THE


CENTRAL FIREARMS
REGISTRY
Presented by Martin Hood
03 May 2023
OVERVIEW
• Communication
• Unilateral changes
• Incorrect records
• Refusal to comply
• Timeous decisions
• Electronic connectivity?
• Requests unanswered
• Lack of transparency
• Costs
COMMUNICATION
• Complete breakdown in communication
between management of CFR and
stakeholders
– Examples:
o No meeting of hunter/SAPS consultative
forum since departure of General Bothma in
2018.
o No meetings with firearm dealers since 2017.
o No regular meetings with Secretary of Police.
UNILATERAL CHANGES
• Unilateral changes in policy
– Example 1:
• Serial numbers now required on barrels:
➢ Not previously required;
➢ See attached court orders of Nicholas Yale and
Humansdorpse Kooperasie Limited. “A” and
“B” respectively.
UNILATERAL CHANGES CONT
– Example 2:
o Unilateral changes recently selectively
imposed:
➢ Brigadier Sikhakhane paradoxically continues
to issue import permits:
▪ After these court cases for firearms;
▪ Without barrel serial numbers - See import
permits for Guns and Bows “C” and “D”;
▪ No criteria for exemption available.
UNILATERAL CHANGES CONT
– Example 3:

o Only dealer can import firearms;


o No temporary permits for firearms for
foreigners;
o Currently subject to legal challenge.
UNILATERAL CHANGES CONT
− Example 4:
o Requirement for transportation of firearms:
➢ CFR says firearms can only be transported in
lockable containers.
➢ Currently pending a High Court
judgment on this issue of interpretation;
➢ Came about after meeting with RAM
Couriers in Cape Town.
INCORRECT RECORDS
• Incorrect data on Central Firearms
Registry;
• Refusal of CFR to change their records:
– Example - Nicholas Yale (“NY”):
o CFR says NY has 7303 firearms in its
possession;
o NY does not possess these firearms;
o NY has records to show to whom these
firearms were transferred;
o Request for access to information submitted,
awaiting answer.
REFUSAL TO COMPLY
• Example:
– Barrel changes:
o Notwithstanding judgment of Judge Davis on
17th of January 2023 - attachment “E”;
o SAPS refused to comply with this court order;
o SAPS advised author that this matter is on
appeal;
o It is not;
o Brigadier Sikhakhane will not commit to
complying with court order - attached letter
dated 18 April 2023, attachment “F”;
o No answer received
TIMEOUS DECISIONS
• Failure to make timeous decisions:
– Numerous court orders granted against
SAPS:
o Particularly for failure to process amnesty
applications;
o And other applications as well.
– In excess of 20 costs orders granted for
individuals – approximately 200 persons;
– Costs orders granted for many security
companies as well.
ELECTRONIC CONNECTIVITY
• Lack of electronic connectivity
notwithstanding 2019 court order;
• SAPS do not appear to have officially
awarded tender, notwithstanding written
judgment ordering them to do so;
• Current contempt of court judgment
awaited from Judge Khumalo on failure to
comply with court order;
• See original 2019 order attachment “G”.
REQUESTS UNANSWERED
• Request for access to information go
unanswered:
– Example:
o The South African Arms and Ammunition
Dealer’s Association;
•

➢ Submitted a request on the 13th of February


2023 for simple information relating to why a
dealer’s and transporter’s licence is only valid
for one year;
➢ SAPS have not answered simple request via
access to information submission.
LACK OF TRANSPARENCY
• The Appeal Board conducts its
proceedings:
– In private;
– Without allowing legal representations;
– As provided for in Act 60 of 2000 and per court
order attachment “H”.
COST
• A State employed private advocate charged State
Attorneys Office for 16 (sixteen) days
preparation for court hearing.
– On taxation only 1 (one) day was allowed for
preparation.
• Private advocates can argue two urgent
applications 4 x weekly. See account of Advocate
Masoma attachment “I”.

• This is a clear case of overcharging (abusing) the


State Attorneys resources.
Thank you for listening to
this brief presentation

QUESTIONS

Martin Hood
[email protected]
082 553 9252

You might also like