Articles appeared in yesterday’s media reporting that Unit 14 Security Services had obtained a court order forcing the head of the Central Firearm Register to issue firearm licences to the company.
This action on the part of Unit 14 Security was unnecessary and premature. The Central Firearm Register of the South African Police Service (SAPS) was already busy with the application and was communicating with the company regarding amending a contradiction between their application forms and a Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority (PSIRA) report which is required before approving firearm licence applications from security companies.
PSIRA is the security company regulator and prior to the issue of firearm licences to a security company, the SAPS’s Central Firearm Register must acquire a report from PSIRA confirming that the company is registered and a responsible person has been identified (that is, the person in the company who will be held responsible for the firearms licences and issue and use of the firearms in question).
On 19 May 2011 the Central Firearm Register (CFR) received the PSIRA report for Unit 14 Security but noted that the responsible person on the PSIRA report was not the same person identified as the responsible person on the firearm licence application forms.
Acting in good faith, the CFR requested the security company to rectify this matter with PSIRA because their application for licences and temporary authorisation permits could not be considered until this had been done. The amended PSIRA Report, dated 29 July 2011, was received by the CFR on 2 August 2011.
All the applications – 24 licences and six temporary authorisations - were then considered and approved on 3 August 2011. The CFR is busy with the capturing of the approvals and Unit 14 will be informed of the decision during the course of next week.
As Unit 14 Security Services had been consulted with on the error in terms of the identity of the responsible person and was fully aware that the CFR was in the process of dealing with the application and could only finalise the process once the amended PSIRA report had been obtained, it is the considered opinion of the SAPS that the company jumped the gun, so to speak, by approaching the High Court.
During the discussions between the CFR and the attorney representing Unit 14, the said attorney agreed to remove the matter which he had placed on the court roll, pending the rectification of the company’s accreditation with PSIRA. In the full knowledge that the CFR was assisting the applicant, the attorney – without advising the CFR – put the matter back on the court roll.
There is no backlog on firearm licence applications in so far as businesses are concerned and security companies resort under the business classification.
In this instance the personnel of the CFR actually went out of their way to assist the applicant by informing them that the responsible person was incorrectly reflected with PSIRA and requested Unit 14 to ensure that the correct details be provided to PSIRA so that the process could be correctly finalised.
The administration process of the CFR was efficient and professional and instead of simply refusing the applications on the grounds of the discrepancy in the identification of the responsible person, the applicant was assisted so that their application could be processed as speedily as possible.
Enquiries:
Brigadier Sally de Beer
Cell: 082 779 8658
Twitter – Sally RSA
Captain Dennis Adriao
Tel: 012 400 6579 / 6629 / 6576
Fax: 012 400 7018
Cell: 082 828 5773
E-mail: mediacentre@saps.org.za
Source: South African Police Service
