CPF Affiliation

DNW = Doringkloof Neighbourhood Watch                          CPSF2 = Lyttelton Community Police Sub Forum 2

DRA = Doringkloof Residents Association                              Additional abbreviations at bottom of document


The undermentioned information is provided by the DNW so that, via an informed decision, our residents are in a proper position to vote for/against the DNW affiliating with CPSF2 .


In this regard the DNW, as a component of the DRA, has invoked item 4.c. of the DRA Constitution nm. “Invite public participation via free discussion and deliberation so that the broader interests of the Doringkloof population are taken into consideration.”

The information, which has been accumulated via research and from various meetings during the past two months, has undergone governance through numerous channels to assist with the authenticity thereof.  It is provided for guidance purposes only and the DNW will not be held accountable for any misrepresentation or misunderstanding of the information.


Residents are welcome to, and are advised to, undertake their own research.


As an additional service, members of the DNW Crime Prevention Committee will be available to answer your questions, to address your concerns and receive your input/advice at two information sessions :


Date      Saturday, 16 September 2017

Place     Jansen Park (Kiaat Street)

Times    11h00 to 12h00 and 15h00 to 16h00


Please vote, but consider the implications of your vote very carefully.


Statement / Question Advantages / Positives of Affiliation Dis-advantages / Negatives / Implications of Affiliation
Does the DNW have to affiliate? Yes – to become a component of the broader crime prevention community. No – There is no legal obligation whatsoever to affiliate. Refer to “Important considerations for all voters”, items 1 to 3 below.
Important considerations for all voters :

  1. There is no legal obligation whatsoever to affiliate.
    1. SAPS Act 68 of 1995 states (under Chapter 7, Item 18 (2)) “This Chapter shall not preclude liaison by the Service with the community by means other than through community police forums and boards”.
    2. The Bill of Rights (Chapter 2 of the Constitution of South Africa), Chapter 18, states that “Everyone has the right to freedom of association”.
  2. The Bill of Rights (Chapter 2 of the Constitution of South Africa), Chapter 9, states that “Everyone is equal before the law and has the right to equal protection and benefit of the law”.
  3. The SAPS Interim Regulations for Community Police Forums and Boards, Item 7 (d), states that the constitution of a CPF, sub-forum or board must set out “the membership requirements which may not be such that they have the effect of unfairly discriminating against any member of the community on any ground”.
Are SAPS crime statistics available to the DNW ? SAPS stats are only provided to affiliated members at CPSF2 Exco meetings. The provided SAPS stats are inclined to be for CPSF2 as a whole and are seldom specific to Doringkloof.


The DNW compiles its’ own stats for Doringkloof-related crimes and our crime prevention actions are based on these stats, not those of the SAPS.


SAPS information is obtained from the community as the victims of crime. History has shown that a properly organized community entity will usually have more information than SAPS can hope to have. This is because community members have a vested interest in reporting crimes to their structures, rather than report them to SAPS.


Signing a form (to join the CPF) cannot entitle anybody to more information than another person who has not signed the form.


CPF meetings are public meetings which can, as a matter of legislated right, be attended by any community member, whether a CPF member or not. Such attendees can therefore obtain the same information that is provided to CPSF2 Exco members.

How can the Community Safety Plan be improved ? The CPF’s Community Safety Plan can be improved due to a combined effort from the whole sector. The DNW is prepared to provide voluntary input without being forced to affiliate.


Provide clarity on the CPF statements re SA Constitution and CPF membership. Statement : “In terms of the South African Constitution, all community members are already members of the CPF, whether they participate or not.”

Statement : “If you live in the community you are automatically a member of the CPF.”

Reference : Minutes of the LS2 Affiliation Discussion Meeting of 17 August 2017.

The adjacent statements are disputed. In effect they imply that all South African citizens are CPF members, inclusive of the criminals and illegal immigrants because they are all “community members” or they “live in the community”.


It is requested that the CPF Chairperson should clarify in writing.

What support can be expected from the CPF ? The CPF provides leadership, management and training. According to the CPF “Not affiliating will result in the exclusion of the community, non-compliance, and not being exposed to the leadership, management and training that the CPF offers.”


The DNW believes that it already has sufficient “leadership, management and training”.

Will crime prevention improve if the DNW affiliates ? Improved crime prevention should result because information is shared and the various crime prevention initiatives in CPSF2, to some extent, become involved in areas other than their own. Other crime prevention initiatives becoming involved in Doringkloof could be problematic because their members may not know the area and may not be able to communicate with our patrollers or co-ordinators.


To improve crime prevention more Doringkloof residents need to join the DNW.

Will registration at SAPS encourage more patrollers to register ? Participation may increase because of a) formalised patrol structures b) having SAPS in charge of patrols and c) patrollers not patrolling with perceived vigilantes.


The current DNW patrols are semi-formalised and work well. The formalised patrols, with SAPS in charge, could deter participation.


Compulsory registration as CPF Patrollers, may imply :

a) Compulsory participation in local SAPS/CPF operations.

b) Compulsory participation in SAPS/CPF operations in other areas, without compensation for fuel or other expenses.

c) Adhering to SAPS instructions and requirements during patrols. Presumably SAPS will take over the DNW mass community patrols.

d) Security implications to Doringkloof when our patrollers are deployed elsewhere.

e) A disruption to our crime prevention responses if only registered patrollers are allowed at crime scenes eg.”Why must I respond ? Leave it to the CPF Patrollers”.


Note : Regarding patrols in other areas the Dept of Community Safety already deploys patrollers to taxi and bus ranks, schools and shopping malls. Patrollers have also been required to do traffic warden duty. There are no guarantees that this will not happen here.


All patrollers are regarded as “CPF Patrollers” or “DCS patrollers” and they are bound by the “Regulatory Guidelines for CPF Patrollers in terms of Clause 4.13 of the GPCPB Constitution”   Reference : CPSF2 Constitution, Annexure Q, Regulatory Guideline.


The DNW does not agree with the constraints placed on patrollers in these “Guidelines” eg. having to patrol for 16 hours per week. These “Guidelines” are a component of the CPSF2 Constitution, which implies that they must be enforced. “Selective enforcement” cannot apply.


Uncertainty surrounding affiliation is already causing DNW members stop patrolling because of perceived implications to patrollers.


Too much time and effort is already being spent on administrative and legal requirements in place of fighting crime


The CPF and/or CPSF2 could force the DNW to bring schools, businesses and religious institutions into the affiliation, thereby increasing the administrative burden.


A community is inclined to follow successful groups of people and, taking hands with the entire community will increase efficiency. But, by forcing people to affiliate with an organization with which they may have some concerns, will decrease efficiency and will drive patrollers away.


For example, if it is perceived that there is a power struggle by the CPF “to control everything” (even at the risk of discouraging membership) a probable consequence is that a number of people will simply stop being involved at all.


The CPF should create an organisation that people want to join, without being forced to join.

To what extent can the patrollers be assured that their personal details are safe ? Irrespective of whether patrollers register or not, SAPS does not have powers to obtain personal information (from the municipality, RICA, SARS, etc) without a warrant or without consent. No assurances are provided on the security of patrollers’ personal information in the files at SAPS and at Dept of Community Safety.


Any possible risk to the security of patrollers’ personal information in the files at SAPS and Dept of Community Safety is of concern. Unauthorised / illegal use of the information could have severe implications to the registered patrollers. Identity theft comes to mind.


Any private person can provide fingerprints and request a police clearance. There is in need to be a member of the CPF for this to be done.


In effect, the DNW can request a resident to provide consent for a police clearance to be obtained eg. before a community radio may be purchased.

Upon affiliation whose Constitution and Code of Conduct will prevail ? The CPF Constitution and Code of Conduct will prevail over those of all the affiliates. The DNW is of the opinion that the CPSF2 Constitution and the CPSF2 Code of Conduct (and their annexures) are not consistent in their wording and therefore in their application. The DNW is very uncomfortable about the implications of having to comply with these documents and their annexures in their current formats. The DNW cannot affiliate with an organization whose constitution does not provide for such procedure.

Both documents (and their annexures) need to be amended before any form of affiliation can be considered.


Also, all members and all its structures become bound by the CPSF2 Constitution and Code of Conduct. “Structures” are currently undefined


DRA is currently in the process of restructuring our Constitution so that the DRA and the DNW will be seen as a Parent / Child relationship, but as different entities.


The key question that must be asked in regard to the restructure of the Constitution is “Are two separate bodies or one body the way to go?”


A church can affiliate with a CPF. Does this mean that the church must compile a constitution ?

A constitution of one body cannot bind members of another body. Such institution will have its own constitution. The only proviso is that the affiliating body’s constitution must not be in conflict with the main constitution.

Example: The CPF constitution will say the chairperson is the only spokesperson for the CPF. Does that mean the chairperson will become the spokesperson of the church?


The key words are “must not be in conflict with” but no information is provided on whether or not any leeway is provided.

Is there insurance / assurance for CPF Patrollers ? Registered CPF Patrollers are covered by a R85.000 life assurance policy.













The policy provided by Dept of Community Safety has not been provided to the DNW. It is assumed that, as a life assurance policy, it does not cover disability, partial disability, loss of income, damage to private vehicles or loss/damage to personal property.


If injured, patrollers may not be taken to private medical facilities – only state hospitals may be used. Injured patrollers are not allowed to choose their preferred medical facility unless they are prepared to cover all their own medical costs.


Neither the DRA nor the DNW are in a position to provide any form of insurance/assurance for patrollers.


Registered patrollers must, in their own interests, advise their insurance and assurance companies of the risks associated with their activities AND, as a consequence, these patrollers must face the financial burden of increased premiums.


The above mentioned approach actually applies to all patrollers, but the risks associated with being a CPF Patroller are likely to be far greater than those associated with a neighbourhood watch patroller who occasionally participates in order to observe and report.


Note : It has not yet been clarified if patrollers need to declare increased/potential risks to their medical aid schemes.

Will the CPF provide equipment for patrollers ? An increased “CPF membership” could be used by the CPF to motivate the supply of equipment by Dept Community Safety eg. Reflective vests, batons and torches. The CPF can ask and hope that some equipment will be provided but, to date, none of the CPF sub-forums have received any equipment or funds.


If CPSF2 need funds, the only source of such funds must be the affiliated members.


Since inception the DNW has been funded by the Doringkloof community and businesses.


Doringkloof residents may stop contributing funds to the DRA and DNW because the funds may be used elsewhere, thereby placing our whole community at risk because less funds will be available for specific requirements eg, repeater replacement/insurance, banking costs, protective equipment and implementation of the CCTV system.

What patroller training can be expected ? Patroller training is provided by CPSF2, SAPS and Dept Community Safety eg. Arrest procedures and Schedule 1 Offences.


Other training such as First Aid, Crime Scene Preservation and Anti Hi-jacking is provided by private companies to CPSF2 at reduced costs.


Training such as First Aid, Crime Scene Preservation and Anti Hi-jacking is provided by private companies and can therefore be arranged for Doringkloof, albeit at a higher cost than is applicable to CPSF2.


SAPS cannot restrict training to registered patrollers and refuse to train ordinary members of the community – this will be discriminatory.


The DNW is already in a position to provide radio training and Crime Awareness training and some residents have recently received First Aid training.

What legal protection is provided ? Registered patrollers receive legal protection from the CPF.



The CPF talks about “legal protection” but there is no clarity on the meaning of “legal protection” or the circumstances under which “legal protection” will or will not be provided.


Neither the DRA nor the DNW are in a position to provide any form of legal support for patrollers, especially for those who act beyond the constraints of applicable laws. In effect, both the DRA and the DNW are indemnified from claims against them as per the Indemnity which is included in the DNW Code of Conduct.

Who may respond to crime scenes ? Only registered and trained patrollers can respond to crime scenes. Any person can respond to a call for help from someone who calls that person to come and help. Any person can respond to a crime scene – there is no law prohibiting private persons from doing so. It is for the property owner or the legal occupier of a property to decide on who to allow or disallow on the property.

When it’s a crime scene, SAPS can make that decision but only in consultation with the property owner, UNLESS SAPS believes that the presence of anyone (including a CPF patroller) will destroy evidence.


The same principles above apply to any person that may make an arrest. There is no need to be a registered patroller to do so.


Based on SAPS insisting that patrollers must be registered it seems that such persons become clothed with rights and powers that other people don’t have. Whether registered or not, a patroller is a private person, and there is no law that affords more rights and privileges to so-called patrollers.


Because SAPS insists that only registered patrollers may respond to a crime scene, possible loss of life may occur because an “ordinary patroller” is not allowed to enter a crime scene to provide life support during the period in which SAPS or registered patrollers are still on the way.

Will the DNW co-ordinators experience greater workloads ? The expected CPSF2 Communication Strategy, will include applications called Slack, My BoloBook and Zello, but they will not replace any existing communication systems in neighbourhood watches. The DRA has compiled a Communication Strategy which includes the radio network and an application called WhatsApp.


If affiliated, the DRA Communication Policy will need to be complied with by the co-ordinators, in addition to them using Slack, My BoloBook and Zello.


The possible resignation of some DNW co-ordinators must be considered seriously because, as unpaid volunteers, they may not be prepared to undertake the additional workloads and costs associated with cellphone upgrades and data costs.


Also, the usefulness and effectiveness of the DNW radio network could be “diluted” because other technologies are preferred.

It is anticipated that the whole CPSF2 area will be serviced by a centrally located JOC (Joint Operations Centre)


How will the proposed JOC be resourced ?

(No information available when this document was compiled) If affiliated, DNW co-ordinators may be compelled to provide their services and travel to/from the centrally located CPSF2 JOC.


Co-ordinators may resign because they have to serve areas other than Doringkloof, in which they have a vested interest.


Note : The DNW operates via “virtual” JOC’s in the form of co-ordinators who work from home or from wherever the radio network can be accessed. This approach avoids all travelling expenses and provides for their security because nobody (especially the criminals) knows where the co-ordinators are located.

Must I buy a community radio ? Additional two-way radios will be requested from Dept of Community Safety There is no guarantee that any radios will be provided.


Due to the many uncertainties, DNW radio ownership (and involvement) may be delayed, may decrease or may only apply to community matters such a power failures and dogs in the street.


Concern : The DNW may, as an affiliate and  via a CPSF2 Exco resolution, be compelled to extend the radio network to other affiliates of CPSF2  eg. LX11 where no radio facilities are available yet.

What are the benefits of working with SAPS ? SAPS has regular meetings with the CPF to ensure members are aware of protocols and receive crime-sensitive information Note : “SAPS will only cooperate with community crime-prevention structures that are affiliated to the CPF” Ref :



Will DNW / SAPS relationships deteriorate because of non-affiliation? Relationships will not deteriorate. Relationships may deteriorate because “SAPS will only cooperate with community crime-prevention structures that are affiliated to the CPF”, as mentioned above.


An organization cannot exist in vacio. It has people, people with constitutional rights, to be served by the SAPS.


A citizen cannot be deprived of the constitutional right to be served by SAPS. Even a murderer must be served by SAPS if a valid complaint as a victim of crime has been lodged.

What are the patroller control measures ? CPF patrollers have to register, get security clearance, book on and off and give info through to the Police.



Reference : Minutes of the LS2 Affiliation Discussion Meeting of 17 August 2017.

The DNW already has a patroller management system via which patrollers book on and off, and provide patrol reports to a co-ordinator.


If non-registered members “are not controlled or organised via local SOP’s they can be seen as “vigilante patrollers”.


Reference : Minutes of the LS2 Affiliation Discussion Meeting of 17 August 2017.

Does the CPF have a written partnership agreement with SAPS Lyttelton ? The CPF has a “partnership” with Lyttelton SAPS but it is not documented.

For an institution to join this partnership, it must be affiliated to the CPF

Although a SAPS/CPF “partnership” exists, it is not a written agreement in which eg. the obligations and responsibilities of the partners are stipulated and agreed to.

Many documents, even the SAPS Act, refer to the need for SAPS/community partnerships.

The DNW believes that a formal partnership agreement with SAPS and CPSF2 could be more beneficial to all parties in place of affiliating.

Which CPSF2 neighbourhood watches have adopted the CPSF2 Constitution ? The CPSF2 Constitution was adopted in February 2017 by KROC, Lyttelton Crimestop and Lytcom, but not by the DNW. The DNW will be regarded as the “black sheep” for not accepting to affiliate.
What are the possible implications to DNW of CPSF2 Exco resolutions ? As a control measure, resolutions are approved at CPSF2 Exco level and are then presented at meetings with affiliates for ratification. DNW could be out-voted at future CPSF2 meetings i.r.o. CPSF2 resolutions. For example, the DNW may have to comply with these possible resolutions  :

“Each affiliate must contribute R2000 to a SAPS end-of-year function” or “A JOC will be established and each affiliate must contribute R5000 towards startup costs”.


Should such resolutions be ratified, some of the funds contributed by our residents will be “lost” to Doringkloof.

Is the CPF a legal entity ? The CPF is regarded as a legal entity. It does not regard either the DRA or the DNW as legal entities. “Legal Entity means that it is either registered with the Companies Registrar or has been given some kind of legal existence due to the working of law, such as the forming of a partnership via an agreement between people.

An association of people need not be registered anywhere, it only needs an agreement of cooperation of sorts.  Thus the DNW is such an association. “

Ref : Pieter van Oudtshoorn, DRA Compliance Officer.

What DRA/DNW documentation is affected  ?   All DRA/DNW documentation must be reviewed/revised incl DRA/DNW Constitutions and DRA/DNW Code of Conduct to cater for affiliation or non-affiliation with CPSF2 (or another entity) now and/or in the future.
Exactly who in DRA/DNW must register, and why ? All CPF patrollers must be registered with Dept of Community Safety (DCS).


Ref Pieter van Oudtshoorn, DRA Compliance Officer : In terms of current regulations all patrollers, co-ordinators, responders (MM) and radio owners must be registered.


The inconvenience of complying with all the legal requirements for police clearance and registration eg. personal details, ID photo, proof of residence, finger printing, etc, could cause residents not to participate.


To register about 500 radio owners and to constantly ensure that their details are up to date will be a major task for which the DNW does not have resources.


The whole “registration process” could be the downfall of the DNW to the benefit of the criminal elements.


CPSF2 = Lyttelton Community Police Sub Forum 2, which (without too much detail) consists of :

KROC (Kloofsig Radio On Call)  – the suburb of Kloofsig

Lyttelton Crimestop –  bordered by Botha, Clifton and River roads and a triangular residential area west of Kloofsig.

Lytcom –  bordered by Botha and Trichardt roads, the Waterkloof Air Force base and the industrial area in Kruger Avenue.

LX 11 – bordered by Botha, Amkor, Clifton and Limpopo roads. LX11 is not yet fully structured as a neighbourhood watch.

Doringkloof Neighbourhood Watch (DNW), bordered by Botha, Limpopo and Leonie roads and the N1 Freeway)

DRA = Doringkloof Residents Association

CPF = Community Police Forum

SAPS = SA Police Services

GPCPB = Gauteng Province Community Police Board

20170913 20h00