Presidency Budget: Why is violent crime still not contained

The speech below was delivered during the Debate on Budget Vote 1: The Presidency.

The first duty of any democratic government is not merely to govern, but to protect. It is to create the conditions in which citizens may live freely, pursue opportunity, and enjoy the rights guaranteed to them by the Constitution.

Freedom is precious. Yet no society can exist where every individual exercises absolute freedom without restraint. In a constitutional democracy, citizens willingly surrender a measure of that freedom in exchange for something greater: the protection of their lives, their liberty, and their property under the rule of law. This is the essence of the social contract. It is the foundation upon which every democratic state rests, and it is the standard against which every government must ultimately be judged.

When the State fails in that responsibility, the consequences are devastating. Not only are lives lost, but public confidence in government, democracy, and the Constitution itself begins to erode.

That is why the crisis within South Africa's criminal justice system is not merely a departmental failure. It is a failure of governance. It strikes at the heart of the State's most fundamental obligation to its people.

If we are serious about changing the trajectory of our country, if we are serious about restoring faith in public institutions, then we must confront an uncomfortable truth: our criminal justice system is failing at almost every level.

On average, 58 South Africans lose their lives every day to violence. Behind every statistic is a human story-a child whose future has been stolen, a parent who will never return home, a family permanently shattered.

Yet while communities live in fear, we are confronted by a police service whose senior leadership has repeatedly been tainted by allegations of corruption and misconduct. At station level, officers often lack the most basic resources required to perform their duties effectively. Cases that do make it to court are too frequently hampered by incomplete investigations, inadequate prosecution capacity, and overwhelming case backlogs. Beyond that lies a correctional services system unable to account for more than 28,000 parolees, while many offenders emerge from incarceration more dangerous than when they entered.

The result is a criminal justice chain that is breaking at every link-from investigation, to prosecution, to incarceration, and ultimately to rehabilitation.

This is not merely an administrative concern. It is a profound constitutional failure.

When the President says he is prepared to face the mothers who have lost children to gang violence, he makes a serious statement. But the question before us is not whether he can face them. The question is whether the State has done everything within its power to prevent those losses in the first place.

Can any of us honestly say that it has?

Every day that passes, another 58 South Africans lose their lives. These are not abstract figures on a spreadsheet. They are sons and daughters raised with hope and love. They are mothers and fathers who worked tirelessly to provide for their families. They are elderly citizens who spent a lifetime contributing to society. They are vulnerable children who fall prey to predators because the State has failed to shield them from exploitation and violence.

They relied upon government to keep them safe.

And that is why this matter is inherently political-not in the narrow partisan sense, but in the truest sense of public responsibility. Every preventable death reflects decisions made, priorities chosen, and policies pursued by those entrusted with governing.

If a functioning criminal justice system could save even one innocent life, it would be worth every effort. But we are not speaking of one life. We are speaking of thousands.

That is why it is so difficult to understand the resistance to practical alternatives that could strengthen public safety.

What has been proposed is not the weakening of the State, but the strengthening of it. It is not the fragmentation of authority, but the mobilisation of all available capacity in service of a common purpose.

Provinces and capable metropolitan governments have repeatedly called for greater powers to investigate crime, gather intelligence, manage forensic functions, and develop targeted responses to local crime patterns. This is not a demand for separation. It is an offer of partnership.

Where local governments have been empowered to act within their existing mandates, initiatives such as LEAP officers and community safety programmes have delivered measurable results. Yet their impact remains constrained by legislative limitations imposed by national government.

What is required now is a willingness to recognise that no single sphere of government can solve this crisis alone.

The Constitution already provides for cooperative governance. What is needed is the political will to give practical effect to that principle.

The reforms required do not demand constitutional amendments. They require legislative changes and a simple recognition that every capable institution of government should be empowered to contribute to protecting South Africans.

If the President truly believes that this issue should rise above politics, then let us engage these proposals on their merits. Let us ask one simple question: will they save lives?

Because that is the measure by which history will judge us.

If I were entrusted with the responsibility of addressing this crisis, I would marshal every available resource, every sphere of government, every civil society organisation, and every capable stakeholder in pursuit of a single objective: reducing violent crime and saving lives.

No party political consideration should outweigh that duty.

No ideology should be more important than the life of a child.

No loyalty should supersede accountability.

And that accountability must extend to those whose actions-or inaction-have contributed to the weakening of our police service, our prosecuting authority, our specialised investigative units, our courts, and our correctional system. South Africans deserve a government that confronts failure, not one that recycles it.

I do not believe that the President takes pleasure in the loss of a single South African life. I do not doubt that he shares the grief felt by countless families across our nation.

But compassion alone is not enough.

The office he occupies carries immense power and profound responsibility. Through decisive leadership, principled decision-making, and meaningful reform, lives can be saved.

The people of South Africa deserve a government that can look them in the eye and say, truthfully, that it has done everything within its power to protect them. They deserve a government that treats every preventable death as a call to action. They deserve a government that understands that public safety is not merely another policy priority-it is the very foundation upon which freedom, dignity, and democracy depend.

It is not too late.

We cannot bring back those whose lives have already been lost through years of corruption, mismanagement, and failed policy choices. But we can honour their memory by ensuring that fewer South Africans suffer the same fate.

Mr President, we cannot save those we have already lost.

But together, if we choose courage over complacency and action over excuses, we can save those who are still with us.