Author: MIL OSI Publisher

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Guy Lamb, Criminologist / Senior Lecturer, Stellenbosch University

Crime researchers use murder (or homicide) rate per 100,000 as a crude measure of the general level of violent interpersonal crime globally. According to the United Nations Office for Drugs and Crime, South Africa’s murder rate of 45 per 100,000 (2023/24) is the second highest for countries that publish crime data.

The South African Police Service crime data shows that levels of attempted murder, armed robbery and robberies at homes have soared over the past 10 years. Other categories of violent crime, such as assault and sexual violence, also remain high.

High crime rates have had considerable negative effects on the country’s economy. The destructive impact of violent crime is estimated to cost the equivalent of 15 % of GDP.

In 2019, President Cyril Ramaphosa indicated that government would seek to reduce violent crime by 50% within a decade. The police budget increased by 24% from 2018/19 to 2024/25. But the murder rate increased by 25%, from 36 per 100,000 in 2018/19 to 45 per 100,000 in 2023/24.

I have spent 25 years researching violent crime and policing in South Africa. I also wrote a 2022 book, Policing and Boundaries in a Violent Society, and conducted various studies for the Institute for Security Studies.

In my view, the logical approach for government is to attend to the top 100 high crime areas. I’ll show why below. It must use the resources of the departments in its justice, crime prevention and security cluster to intervene in targeted, evidence-based ways, to combat and prevent crime.

Where crime is happening and what police are doing

Violent crime in South Africa has consistently been highly concentrated in a small number of urban areas. For example, 20% of all reported murders occur in just 30 policing areas (2.6% of the 1,149 policing areas). About 50% of all violent crime occurs in 100 policing areas (9% of the precincts).

Place-based crime reduction interventions have yielded positive results in high crime cities in a variety of countries, such as the US, Argentina and Trinidad and Tobago.

But in South Africa, the approach to fighting crime has focused instead on arrests and on force. This is why increasing the funding hasn’t had results.

The police arrested around 1.5 million criminal suspects a year between 2019/20 and 2023/24. (The exception was 2020/1, with 2.8 million arrests due to COVID-19 lockdown violations.)

A negative outcome of this police action has been rising civil claims against police, amounting to R67.4 billion (US$3.6 billion) as of March 2024 (47,818 claims).

The police have also used militarised approaches, such as Operation Shanela. Officers have been encouraged to be more forceful against alleged criminals.

There is very little evidence to suggest that militarised policing reduces violent crime. It can actually contribute to declining public trust in the police. Only 27% of the population consider police trustworthy (from 47% in 1999).

Despite the police budget increasing in recent years, their effectiveness has been undermined by declining personnel numbers. In 2018, there were 150,639 police personnel. This has dropped to 140,048 in recent years. There has also been a substantial reduction in the police reserve force.

A further challenge is the high rate of recidivism (re-offending). An estimated 90% of offenders commit crime again after leaving prison.

Six actions for 100 worst areas

I argue that six things need to happen in the 100 worst crime areas:

• reduce the number of firearms in circulation

• improve the number of court-ready police dockets

• improve place-based crime intelligence

• reduce alcohol harms

• provide rehabilitation and support services for offenders

• boost community safety organisations.

Firearms control

Firearms are the leading weapon used in murders and in several categories of robberies. They are also commonly used in sexual violence, and feature in gangsterism and organised crime.

Confiscating illegal firearms and ammunition, and securing convictions for those found in possession of illegal firearms, will have a positive impact in the target areas.

This requires a close working relationship between police and the National Prosecuting Authority to collect appropriate evidence and prepare court dockets adequately.

Rulings by magistrates that declare certain people unfit to possess licensed firearms must be monitored regularly.

Court-ready police dockets

The National Prosecuting Authority has undergone reforms over the past six years to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the criminal justice system. As a result, it has secured high conviction rates for several categories of violent crimes. However, many police dockets lack sufficient reliable evidence for the prosecutors to present so as to secure convictions in court.

As the table below shows, the vast majority of recorded violent crime cases do not result in a court conviction.

Police officials in high crime areas are typically overwhelmed by the large number of criminal cases they need to investigate. That means only a small number of dockets that have a likelihood of securing a conviction are prepared.

More resources are needed to increase cooperation between the police and prosecutors.

Place-based crime intelligence

Better crime intelligence could result in better control of illegal firearms and higher quality police dockets.

Police crime intelligence and other departments in the justice and security cluster must cooperate and share information.

Alcohol harms

Several forms of violent crime are linked to excessive alcohol consumption. Unregulated alcohol outlets present the most risky context for committing violence. There is an opportunity for police, prosecutors (especially through the Community Prosecutions Initiative) and municipalities to collaborate to reduce alcohol related crime and harms in the top 100 high crime areas.

This requires more effective monitoring and policing of alcohol outlets to ensure better compliance with liquor laws.

Rehabilitation and support services for offenders

It is likely that recidivism rates would be reduced if former prisoners and their families had better rehabilitation services in the top 100 high crime areas. Studies suggest that the most effective and practical programmes are those that focus on substance abuse, restorative justice, mental health, education and income generation.

Such services could give former inmates a means to generate an income legally.

Community safety organisations

Studies have shown that crime can be reduced when police and other government entities work closely with community organisations to devise solutions.

Community police forums and neighbourhood watches are examples of these kinds of arrangements.

They can collect intelligence and help the authorities design and implement evidence-based crime prevention actions that focus on the areas where crime is concentrated, and on the situations that tend to drive crime.

– Violent crime in South Africa happens mostly in a few hotspots: police resources should focus there – criminologist
– https://theconversation.com/violent-crime-in-south-africa-happens-mostly-in-a-few-hotspots-police-resources-should-focus-there-criminologist-248233

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Oyewale Tomori, Fellow, Nigerian Academy of Science

US president Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw the US from the World Health Organization is threatening funding for critical health programmes like HIV/Aids and tuberculosis in different parts of the world, including Nigeria.

The Conversation Africa’s Adejuwon Soyinka asked professor of virology and former WHO Africa regional virologist Oyewale Tomori why Nigeria is heavily dependent on US funding for some of its health programmes, what’s at risk and how to mitigate the impact.

How dependent is Nigeria on US funding for health?

Sadly, Nigeria and many African countries are too dependent on US funding and other donor funding for basic health activities and interventions. These activities are the normal function of a good and responsive government which is committed to the welfare of citizens.

According to a US embassy publication, since 2021, the US has committed to providing nearly US$20 billion in health programmes in Africa. The report says in 2023 alone, the US invested over US$600 million in health assistance in Nigeria. That is about 21% of Nigeria’s 2023 annual health budget.

Nigeria has, over the years, allocated on the average about 5% of the national budget to health. Three quarters of that covers recurrent expenditure like salaries.

Nigeria’s proposed 2025 budget is ₦49.74 trillion (US$33 billion), of which ₦2.4 trillion (US$1.6 billion) (4.8%) is allocated to health. This is lower than the 5.15% allocated to health in the 2024 budget.

The private sector plays a significant role in the Nigeria’s healthcare system, providing close to 60% of healthcare services.

In recent years, traditional medicine is increasingly offering complementary and alternative medicine in support of the services provided by the federal, state and local government areas levels.

What health programmes does the US fund in Nigeria?

The US support is focused on preventing malaria, under the US President’s Malaria Initiative; ending HIV, through the US President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief; and delivering vaccines (COVID, polio, rotavirus, IPV2 and HPV).

Malaria is a major public health concern in Nigeria. In 2021, there were an estimated 68 million cases of malaria and 194,000 deaths. Nigeria has the highest burden of malaria globally, nearly 27% of the global malaria burden.

Nigeria has a high burden of HIV – fourth in the world. A large number of Nigerians live with the virus. The national agency responsible for AIDS control reported a rate of 1,400 new HIV cases per week in 2023.

Nigeria has experienced outbreaks of yellow fever, meningitis, cholera, Lassa fever and COVID-19.

In addition to helping with managing these major diseases, the US government also provided funds to strengthen the country’s ability to prevent, detect, respond to and recover from emerging public health threats.

With these funds, a Public Health Emergency Management Programme was established and national disease surveillance systems were upgraded. Nigeria’s laboratory diagnostics were enhanced to test for Ebola, mpox, yellow fever, measles, Lassa fever, cholera and cerebrospinal meningitis.

Other countries (Japan, Germany, Canada, the UK) also provided support through building and equipping laboratories and training health workers.

What’s most at risk?

Interventions most at risk are those of which the Nigerian government has abdicated its responsibilities to the donors. They include provision of rapid diagnostic tests for malaria, insecticide-treated bed nets, malaria preventive treatments in pregnancy, provision of fast acting malaria medicines and insecticide for home spraying.

The following HIV interventions are likely to be adversely affected: HIV counselling and testing services, especially for pregnant women to prevent mother-to-child transmission of HIV, and the care of people living with HIV with TB/HIV services, as well as care and support for orphans and vulnerable children.

Sustaining laboratory capacity for rapid disease diagnosis will suffer a major setback with reduced or lack of reagents and consumables.

A huge amount of laboratory equipment is provided by donors. Servicing and replacement of equipment will be affected.

The Nigerian health sector’s challenges include inadequate funding, shortage of healthcare professionals, poor access to healthcare due to cost, poor infrastructure, and high prevalence of preventable diseases.

Cutting off US money is not likely to affect the shortage of healthcare professionals, as the major reason for the shortage is their deteriorating work environment and unsafe social environment. This environment was created by years of economic downturn and social insecurity in Nigeria.

Why is Nigeria still so reliant on US funding?

I think Nigeria lacks national pride as it begs for assistance to provide what it already has the resources for. The government seems to place the well-being of the citizens on a secondary status.

Many African governments assume the world owes Africa compensation for colonial activities. But to me, the danger to Nigeria’s freedom from dependency is not truly knowing what we are, who we are, and how endowed we are.

The world describes Nigeria as “resource limited” and, without thinking, Nigerians accept such name calling. Nigeria is not resource-limited, it is resource wasteful. Nigeria is not resource constrained; it is corruption constrained. Until Nigerians know who and what we are, we will never find the solution to our problems.

Nigeria’s acceptance of the tag “resource-limited” drives it to beg for assistance even in areas of its highest capability, capacity and competence and where it has highly trained people. Like disease prevention and control.

Africa has since the 1960s experienced numerous outbreaks of diseases and has acquired significant expertise in disease prevention and control. An example is the 2014 Ebola outbreak in Nigeria, which was brought under control within three months with only 20 cases and eight deaths.

This was a disease that raged for three years and ravaged three countries: Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone. It was reported in seven others with 28,600 cases and 11,326 deaths.

In Nigeria, the country coordinated response activities which were anchored on the participation of the community. The community was part of disease investigation, contact tracing, isolation of cases and adoption of infection, prevention and control interventions.

How can Nigeria mitigate the impact?

Nigeria must immediately provide emergency funds to cover the shortfall arising from the action of the US government. What Trump has done should have been anticipated, because he did the same things during his first term of office.

Nigeria must re-order its priorities, and provide funds to create and sustain an enabling environment for talented human resources to function effectively for disease control and prevention.

The country must prioritise disease prevention and control (in that order) through adequate and sustained funding of disease surveillance activities at all levels of governance.

Nigeria needs to decentralise disease surveillance, prevention and control by enabling states and local government areas to take responsibility. The Nigeria Centre for Disease Control and Prevention should coordinate state and local government areas activities, instead of acting as the controller of diseases in Nigeria.

– US health funding cuts: what Nigeria stands to lose
– https://theconversation.com/us-health-funding-cuts-what-nigeria-stands-to-lose-248921

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Stephen Onyeiwu, Professor of Economics & Business, Allegheny College

During its 16th annual summit in Kazan, Russia, Brics – a group of emerging economies determined to act as a counterweight to the west and to whittle down the influence of global institutions – invited Nigeria and eight other countries to join it as “partner” countries. Nigeria formally accepted the invitation in January 2025. That invitation has generated questions about how Nigeria stands to benefit, especially when US president Donald Trump is threatening to sanction members of the group if they replace the US dollar as reserve currency. It was established in 2006 and initially composed of Brazil, Russia, India, and China. South Africa joined in 2010 and the bloc added four new members (Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates) in 2023. In this interview, development economist Stephen Onyeiwu argues that Nigeria stands to gain from a Brics partnership, but would have to carefully balance its domestic interests with those of its western allies and Brics.

What does it mean to be a Brics ‘partner’ country?

The introduction of Brics partnership is an expansion mechanism designed to bring in more participants without giving them full membership. It is akin to “observer” status.

Brics partners can participate in special sessions of summits and foreign ministers’ meetings, as well as other high-level events. Partners can also contribute to the organisation’s official documents and policy statements.

But partners cannot host annual Brics summits or determine the venue. Neither can they select new members and partners.

How beneficial is Brics partnership to Nigeria?

The main benefit would be access to finance offered by Brics’ New Development Bank.

The New Development Bank was established as an alternative to western-dominated international financial institutions like the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. These institutions are sometimes used by the leading western countries to keep developing countries in line on global issues.

Some developing countries are reluctant to criticise western countries for fear of losing access to funding by western-backed international financial institutions.

Nigeria has been running a budget deficit of about 5% of GDP since 2019, and it needs funding to pay for the deficits. The New Development Bank could be an important source of funding for investment in Nigeria’s infrastructure, manufacturing, agriculture, and so on.

New Development Bank loans are also available in member countries’ local currencies. They don’t have to earn foreign exchange to repay the loans. This fosters exchange rate stability and promotes economic growth. The New Development Bank raises funds in member countries’ local currencies, and lends them to member countries.

Nigeria could use its Brics partnership to garner the group’s support in matters that affect Nigeria globally. For instance, there have been requests for African countries to be included as permanent members (without veto power) of the UN security council. South Africa and Nigeria have been touted as potential candidates. Should this issue be raised at the UN, Nigeria can count on the support of its Brics allies, which includes two permanent members (China and Russia) of the security council.

Mutual understanding and cooperation with other Brics members and partners might spill over into economic, trade and investment agreements. Friendly countries are more likely to trade with each other and invest in each other’s economy.

How can Nigeria maximise its status as a Brics partner?

Nigeria should use it to attract foreign direct investment in strategic sectors of the economy, such as infrastructure, manufacturing, agriculture and technology.

Some Brics members, like China, India, and the UAE, have investors that are seeking investment outlets abroad. Nigeria could use the bloc’s annual summits to showcase investment opportunities.

The global economy is transitioning into “frontier industries and technologies”, such as big data, artificial intelligence, solar, drones, gene editing, 3D printing, blockchains, Internet of Things (IoT), 5G, robotics and nanotechnology. China, India and Brazil are already well advanced in these technologies.

Nigeria should use its partnership with these countries to build capabilities in frontier industries and technologies. It could get favourable terms in the transfer of these technologies.

Nigeria seeks to diversify its economy from reliance on the export of hydrocarbons. But Nigerian producers have had a hard time accessing global markets. The country should negotiate trade deals that provide access to Brics markets, especially agricultural and agro-processed products, arts and crafts.

But Nigeria has to promote economic growth and structural transformation at home. If the Nigerian economy falters, it is unlikely the country will be invited to become a full member of Brics.

Would adding new members and partners reduce western dominance?

Brics has so far not been able to significantly change the dynamics of the international political economy. Adding new members and partners, while symbolic, will not act as an effective counterweight to the influence of the G7 and G20 groups of nations.

Most of the countries and partners in Brics are either allies of western countries or neutral on global issues. They are unlikely to support decisions or actions that are grossly inimical to western interests.

Egypt and the UAE, for instance, receive military aid from the United States. Ethiopia and Nigeria are top recipients of foreign aid in Africa, much of it from western-backed financial institutions.

The only outlier in the mix is Iran, whose membership was promoted by Russia. But Iran has no leverage to influence others in the bloc.

On balance, therefore, Brics will not be a threat to western countries.

Brics aspires to weaken the dominance of the US dollar for international transactions. Close to 90% of international trade transactions are conducted with the US dollar.

Brics countries plan to reduce dollar dominance by encouraging member countries to settle their trade and financial transactions using their domestic currencies. For instance, South African businesses could purchase Chinese goods using the South African rand, while the Chinese could do the same for South African goods using the Chinese yuan. The more members you have in Brics swapping their currencies, the less important the US dollar will be.

It is unlikely, however, that an increase in the number of Brics members and partners will weaken the dollar. Most will continue to have significant economic relationships with the west, including trade and foreign aid.

They will also continue to conduct business with many non-Brics countries, which also have economic relationships with the west. They will need the US dollar to transact with many other countries.

So increasing the number of Brics members and partners does not pose a threat to dollar dominance.

– Nigeria’s Brics partnership: economist outlines potential benefits
– https://theconversation.com/nigerias-brics-partnership-economist-outlines-potential-benefits-248943

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Mamokete Modiba, Researcher, Gauteng City-Region Observatory

The South African government declared a national disaster towards the end of 2024 in response to an outbreak of food-borne illnesses. The outbreak had led to the tragic deaths of over 20 children and hospitalisation of hundreds.

Investigations by the National Institute for Communicable Diseases attributed the outbreak to hazardous pesticides such as Terbufos and Aldicarb. The pesticides, used in agriculture, have infiltrated the informal market as unregulated “street pesticides” for rat control, resulting in food contamination.

In response, the government announced several measures. One was that all food handling outlets, including informal retailers known as spaza shops, had to register with their respective municipalities. It also introduced widespread inspection of these outlets for compliance with regulations and health standards.

The measures are a step in the right direction. However, based on our research work at the Gauteng City-Region Observatory (GCRO) over the past decades, they fall short of what is required. In addition, certain aspects, such as mandatory registration and mass inspection of food outlets, may prove difficult to implement effectively.

The Gauteng City Region is a cluster of cities, towns and urban nodes that make up the economic heartland of South Africa. The Gauteng City-Region Observatory is a partnership between the Gauteng provincial government, the University of the Witwatersrand, the University of Johannesburg and Gauteng South African Local Government Association. It has been researching the development dynamics of the region since 2008, providing data-driven insights and strategic guidance to support sustainable development.

The government response to the outbreak of food-borne illnesses addresses the immediate crisis but does not address underlying factors affecting low-income settlements.

Research by GCRO has identified the underlying factors as poor infrastructure and services. Rat infestations stem from poor waste management. This is caused by inadequate public services, failing infrastructure and irregular waste collection.

Dumping, littering and burning waste worsen the public health and environmental risks, including disease transmission and pest infestations.

Based on this evidence, we conclude that the government’s response does not adequately address some of the root causes of the outbreak, due to insufficient understanding of the context. Addressing these systemic failures is not just a public health matter. It also highlights the challenges faced by these communities and emphasises the importance of supporting local economies.

Survey findings

The GCRO’s flagship Quality of Life Survey, conducted every two years since 2009, is one of South Africa’s largest social surveys. It measures various aspects such as Gauteng residents’ socio-economic dynamics, service delivery experiences, and satisfaction with government. It provides longitudinally comparable data to inform decision-making.

The survey covers various topics that have a bearing on the food-borne illnesses outbreak, like basic services, income sources and food security. According to the latest survey (2023/24), access to refuse removal and satisfaction with service delivery has declined in Gauteng.

In the 2023/24 survey, 74% of respondents reported weekly refuse removal, down from 83% in the 2020/21 period. Satisfaction with services dropped from 75% to 64% over the same period – a worrying trend since 2017/18. The survey also shows that over half (57%) of businesses in Gauteng are informal.

Household hunger has increased across ten years of the survey. More than one in ten households experience severe food insecurity: hunger, poor access to food and insufficient spending on nutritious food.

Measures to address the crisis

We now turn to the three government interventions:

Registration of spaza shops

All food handling outlets, including spaza shops, are required to register with their municipalities between November 2024 and February 2025. This is a step in the right direction, towards regulatory compliance and monitoring of the safety of goods being sold to the public. However, it might not be achievable, especially within the specified period.

There are minimum requirements for the registration of spaza shops. These include (re)zoning certificates or consent use, certificates of acceptability (health standards), approved building plans, registration with the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission, and tax clearance. However, many of these businesses operate informally and therefore lack the required documentation.

Any spaza shop that fails to register in time will be closed. This will affect livelihoods and food security, especially in low-income communities where these shops play a vital role.

Spaza shops are a way for many people to make an income, and they supply essential food items to local communities. Households buy from them for a variety of reasons: they are nearby and affordable, open for long hours and offer credit.

Inspection of food outlets

A campaign to inspect all food handling outlets, focusing on spaza shops and informal traders, is underway. Law enforcement is important to remove contaminated food from the market and prevent future outbreaks. But municipalities have limited capacity to conduct such widespread inspections and ensure compliance with health regulations and standards.

The outbreak was partly a result of municipalities’ inability to enforce the rules. If inspections had been regular and thorough, food contamination issues would have been picked up before the current crisis.

The focus on punitive measures, such as closing businesses and prosecuting owners, does not help them to register, reopen and comply. It might harm the informal economy, reflecting a broader trend of criminalising the poor.

Joint fund to support township and rural businesses

Government has set aside R500 million (US$26 million) to support township and rural enterprises, including spaza shops. The fund is intended to improve business infrastructure and build capacity.

But in our view, its eligibility criteria require reconsideration. To qualify, a business owner must be a South African citizen, their business must be registered in the municipality and they must have have valid tax registration. The majority of businesses in these settlements are informal and would not meet the requirements, so the criteria exclude many that need support.

Next steps

The government’s response to the food-borne illness outbreak focuses on the immediate crisis and related symptoms. It overlooks underlying structural factors. The formalisation and compliance of informal businesses may contribute to the solution but will not tackle the root causes.

These include essential infrastructure and services such as water, sanitation and waste management facilities.

– South Africa’s food poisoning crisis: the government’s response isn’t dealing with the real issues
– https://theconversation.com/south-africas-food-poisoning-crisis-the-governments-response-isnt-dealing-with-the-real-issues-245951