Private security, a growing industry in South Africa, has long been a staple for politicians and government officials seeking round-the-clock protection. However, the South Gauteng High Court has ruled that the City of Johannesburg’s VIP protection policy is unconstitutional, ushering in significant changes to how municipal officials are safeguarded.
The ruling, delivered by Judge Stuart Wilson, found that excessive security allocations for municipal officials without proper threat assessments violate South African law. This decision directly impacts the City of Johannesburg’s executives, whose extensive protection measures have drawn criticism for their cost and questionable necessity.
Until now, the City’s VIP protection program had been lavish. The Executive Mayor and Speaker were assigned eight bodyguards each, down from an initial allocation of ten. Members of the Mayoral Committee and committee chairs received between two and five bodyguards. In addition, the policy provided six luxury vehicles for the Mayor and five for the Speaker, with additional vehicles allocated to 12 Mayoral Committee members and various committee chairs.
The scale of this protection came at a high cost. The City reportedly spent over R3 million monthly to maintain a fleet of 40 vehicles and employ 60 bodyguards. These expenditures were endorsed by a City Council resolution in March 2024, but they now face significant reductions following the court’s decision.
Under the new ruling, the Mayor, Speaker, and Chief Whip will be entitled to only two bodyguards each. Any additional protection will require a formal threat assessment conducted by the South African Police Service (SAPS). Should a legitimate danger be identified, SAPS will determine and allocate appropriate resources.
This decision is expected to save millions of rands for the City and reflects a broader push for financial accountability and resource optimization in local government. “Municipal officials cannot justify excessive security measures without clear evidence of threats,” Judge Wilson stated, emphasizing the need for compliance with national laws and responsible governance.
The court’s ruling has sparked mixed reactions. Advocates for fiscal responsibility have welcomed the decision, while some officials argue that it compromises their safety in a volatile political climate.
As the City of Johannesburg adjusts to the new regulations, the ruling signals a shift towards a more balanced approach to VIP protection, ensuring that resources are allocated based on actual needs rather than political status. The SAPS now faces the challenge of conducting thorough threat assessments to ensure that legitimate risks are addressed while avoiding unnecessary expenditure.
