SAPS ACT OVERHAUL

The South African Police Service Amendment Bill [B18-2026] represents the most substantial proposed overhaul of the South African Police Service (SAPS) Act 68 of 1995 in many years. The Bill seeks to modernise a statute enacted before the 1996 Constitution, incorporate subsequent constitutional jurisprudence and policing policy, strengthen professionalisation and integrity mechanisms, reform community and municipal policing arrangements, and update governance, disciplinary and operational provisions across the police service.

The Bill forms part of a wider debate about the structure and effectiveness of policing and criminal justice institutions. In particular, the National Anti-Corruption Advisory Council (NACAC) has proposed a much more fundamental reallocation of responsibilities between the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (DPCI) and the Investigating Directorate Against Corruption (IDAC), together with a National Police Board to strengthen the appointment of senior police leaders. Those proposals are not contained in B18-2026 and should be treated as a separate, though related, reform stream.

Current status

Latest developments from news sources

Legal status: The SAPS Act 68 of 1995 remains in force. The South African Police Service Amendment Bill [B18-2026] was formally introduced in the National Assembly by the Minister of Police on 10 June 2026 as a proposed section 76 Bill.
Parliamentary status: The Bill has been referred to the Portfolio Committee on Police. The committee held its first substantive briefing on the Bill on 5 August 2026 and indicated that a meaningful public participation process would follow.
Policy status: The Bill gives legislative effect to a long-running policy review informed by the Constitution, the National Development Plan, the 2016 White Papers on Policing and Safety and Security, community policing policy, the policy on a single police service, Constitutional Court judgments and recommendations arising from the Marikana Commission and subsequent policing reviews.
Integrity and professionalisation: The Bill proposes integrity testing for new recruits, lifestyle audits where there are reasonable grounds to suspect that a member is living beyond his or her income, a new National Policing Advisory Committee and dedicated disciplinary systems within SAPS and the DPCI.
DPCI status: The Bill amends aspects of the DPCI’s internal functioning and oversight but does not implement NACAC’s proposal to remove serious corruption and serious commercial crime from the DPCI and concentrate those functions in IDAC. NACAC’s proposed mandate restructuring therefore remains a separate policy proposal.
Governance status: The Bill proposes a National Policing Advisory Committee, not the National Police Board proposed by NACAC. The two bodies have different origins, functions and institutional designs and should not be conflated.

Main implementation challenge

The main challenge is that the Bill attempts to modernise a very large and troubled police organisation through an unusually broad legislative package, while many of the problems it seeks to address are fundamentally problems of leadership, institutional culture, integrity and implementation.

Several proposed reforms, including integrity testing, lifestyle audits, professional standards and dedicated disciplinary structures, could strengthen internal accountability. Their impact will nevertheless depend on whether they are applied consistently, adequately resourced and insulated from selective or politically influenced enforcement.

The Bill also sits alongside a broader unresolved debate about criminal justice architecture. NACAC proposes narrowing the DPCI’s mandate and transferring serious corruption and serious commercial crime functions to IDAC. B18-2026 does not do this. Parliament must therefore consider a major overhaul of the SAPS Act while the future division of responsibilities between some of the country’s principal criminal investigation bodies remains unsettled.

Date	Development
5 August 2026	The Portfolio Committee on Police holds its first substantive meeting on B18-2026. Members highlight integrity management, lifestyle audits, municipal policing and community policing as areas requiring close consideration and commit to a meaningful public participation process.
10 June 2026	The Minister of Police formally introduces the South African Police Service Amendment Bill [B18-2026] in the National Assembly. It is referred to the Portfolio Committee on Police.
19 May 2026	The Deputy Minister of Police confirms that implementation of the National Policing Policy and legislative reform are proceeding as part of a wider programme to strengthen professionalism, accountability and ethical leadership in SAPS.
5 December 2025	An explanatory summary of the proposed SAPS Amendment Bill is published in the Government Gazette, giving formal notice of the Minister’s intention to introduce it in Parliament.
August 2025	NACAC publishes its final report recommending major changes to the division of responsibility between the DPCI and IDAC and proposing a National Police Board for senior SAPS appointments.
14 May 2025	Cabinet approves the National Policing Policy, which provides an important policy foundation for the legislative reform process.
2024–2025	The Civilian Secretariat for Police Service advances the SAPS Amendment Bill through legal review, policy and socio-economic impact assessment processes and the Justice, Crime Prevention and Security Cluster.
22 October 2021	The Constitutional Court in Residents of Industry House v Minister of Police confirms the invalidity of part of section 13(7)(c) of the SAPS Act insofar as it authorised warrantless searches, requiring legislative correction.
2016	The White Paper on Policing and White Paper on Safety and Security provide important long-term policy foundations for reform of the policing framework.

ISS Analysis

Professionalisation and integrity are central to the Bill

The legislation attempts to move integrity management from administrative practice towards a clearer statutory framework. New recruits would have to pass an integrity test before appointment. The Bill also permits lifestyle audits of serving members where there are reasonable grounds to suspect that they are living beyond their income and allows the use of financial disclosures, credit histories and information on directorships and state contracts.

It further provides for dedicated disciplinary systems staffed by properly qualified and trained personnel. These reforms respond directly to persistent concerns about police corruption and weak internal accountability. The challenge will be implementation. The Bill does not make routine lifestyle audits mandatory for every member. Their use depends on reasonable suspicion, while integrity testing of new recruits is framed more strongly. Parliament has already indicated that it may examine whether integrity measures should be strengthened further.

The National Policing Advisory Committee could strengthen professional standards, but it is primarily advisory

The proposed Committee would create an external source of expertise on recruitment, promotion, professional standards and training, but it would not itself control senior appointments. The Minister would appoint between seven and nine members following public nominations and a transparent process.

The Committee would develop proposals on recruitment, selection and promotion standards; professional integrity and accountability; police training; and restructuring. At least four members would come from outside the public sector.

This is materially different from NACAC’s proposed National Police Board. NACAC envisages a body specifically intended to strengthen the integrity of senior leadership appointments through independent, expert-led selection arrangements. B18-2026 does not establish that body.

The Bill strengthens DPCI governance without resolving the larger mandate question

B18-2026 changes aspects of how the Hawks operate, but it leaves their core statutory mandate largely intact. The Bill allows the National Head of the DPCI to seek deviations from SAPS standing orders, national instructions or directives where the Directorate’s particular circumstances require them.

It also addresses service arrangements for DPCI personnel, extends powers associated with the retired judge complaint mechanism and requires the DPCI to establish its own dedicated disciplinary system. These are more than merely textual or administrative amendments, but they do not amount to the institutional redesign proposed by NACAC.

NACAC recommends that IDAC become solely responsible for investigating and prosecuting serious corruption and serious commercial crime, while the DPCI focuses on organised crime and other specified serious offences. That would require substantial further legislative and organisational change.

The Bill gives police intelligence a clearer statutory footing

The proposed establishment of an Intelligence Division is an important attempt to place police intelligence structures more explicitly within the SAPS Act. The Bill inserts a new chapter establishing an Intelligence Division within SAPS and regulating its reporting line and cooperation with other intelligence services.

This responds to the broader need for clearer statutory governance of police intelligence and greater accountability in an area repeatedly associated with institutional weakness and abuse. The practical effectiveness of these provisions will depend on leadership, vetting, operational controls and independent oversight rather than statutory recognition alone.

Municipal policing would become more important

The Bill strengthens the statutory framework for municipal police services and expressly allows municipal public order policing capacity. This reflects a wider policy movement towards better coordination between national and municipal policing.

The Portfolio Committee has already indicated that it may consider going further by examining whether appropriately trained municipal police could assume limited investigative functions. That possibility is not yet part of the Bill and should be treated as a parliamentary discussion rather than an enacted or government proposal.

Community policing is being restructured rather than abandoned

The Bill replaces much of the existing community policing framework with a more detailed statutory system. It proposes new provisions for community policing forums, district community policing boards and provincial community policing boards.

The parliamentary committee has emphasised that these structures should strengthen practical collaboration between communities and police stations. The challenge will be to ensure that formal restructuring produces stronger local participation and accountability rather than additional layers of bureaucracy.

Public order and use of force reforms have a strong constitutional dimension

Several provisions respond directly to Constitutional Court judgments and lessons from public order policing failures. The Bill requires police use of force in gatherings or demonstrations to be reasonably necessary and proportionate.

It also updates the statutory framework governing public order policing and permits municipal public order policing capacity. These provisions must be assessed against South Africa’s constitutional protections for assembly, privacy and freedom from arbitrary state coercion, as well as the policing failures highlighted by the Marikana Commission.

The Bill is now being considered in a much more difficult political and institutional environment than when it was drafted

The Madlanga Commission and related parliamentary investigations have intensified scrutiny of senior police leadership, political interference and relationships between police officials and criminal networks. The Portfolio Committee itself has expressly linked its consideration of B18-2026 to the issues emerging from these inquiries.

This creates an opportunity to strengthen the Bill, particularly around integrity and accountability. It also creates a risk that amendments are driven reactively by individual scandals rather than by a coherent long-term institutional design.

Overview

The South African Police Service Act 68 of 1995 provides the principal statutory framework governing the establishment, organisation, regulation and control of SAPS. It came into force before the final Constitution of 1996 and has subsequently been amended numerous times.

The current reform process is the culmination of a long-running review led by the Civilian Secretariat for Police Service. It is informed by the Constitution, the National Development Plan, the 2016 White Papers on Policing and Safety and Security, community policing policy, the policy on a single police service, Constitutional Court judgments and recommendations arising from policing inquiries.

The explanatory summary was gazetted in December 2025. The full South African Police Service Amendment Bill [B18-2026] was introduced in Parliament on 10 June 2026 and is now before the Portfolio Committee on Police.

The statutory reform must be distinguished from broader proposals to redesign South Africa’s policing and anti-corruption architecture. NACAC’s recommendations concerning the DPCI, IDAC and a National Police Board are not contained in B18-2026.

Why this matters

SAPS is the country’s principal policing institution and one of the largest components of the criminal justice system. Its effectiveness directly affects crime investigation, public safety, prosecution outcomes and public confidence in the state.

Persistent weaknesses in police integrity, leadership, discipline, crime intelligence, investigative capacity and internal accountability have undermined performance. The Madlanga Commission and related parliamentary inquiries have further highlighted concerns about corruption, political interference and relationships between senior police officials and criminal networks.

The existing SAPS Act also contains provisions that pre-date the 1996 Constitution or have been affected by subsequent Constitutional Court judgments. Legislative modernisation is therefore necessary both to improve institutional governance and to bring the statutory framework into line with constitutional requirements.

The significance of B18-2026 lies in its breadth. It attempts simultaneously to modernise the legal framework, professionalise the organisation, strengthen internal accountability and reorganise important aspects of policing.

What is being proposed?

B18-2026 proposes a broad range of amendments, including:

Aligning the SAPS Act with the 1996 Constitution and current policing policy;
Establishing the National Policing Advisory Committee;
Strengthening professional standards governing recruitment, selection, promotion and training;
Introducing statutory integrity testing for new recruits and lifestyle audits of serving members in specified circumstances;
Reforming disciplinary arrangements within SAPS and the DPCI;
Regulating the functions and accountability of senior police leadership;
Expanding and clarifying the framework governing municipal police services;
Permitting municipal public order policing capacity;
Restructuring community policing forums and boards;
Establishing a statutory Intelligence Division within SAPS;
Providing a statutory basis for specialised police units;
Updating public order policing and use of force provisions;
Strengthening aspects of DPCI operational autonomy and internal governance;
Expanding the powers and administrative support of the retired judge responsible for certain DPCI complaints;
Creating offences relating to conflicts of interest in investigations, hoaxes and unlawful use of blue lights; and
Making consequential amendments to the Regulation of Gatherings Act, National Road Traffic Act and Civilian Secretariat for Police Service Act.

Institutions and actors

Lead department: Civilian Secretariat for Police Service.
Political lead: Minister of Police.
Primary institutional stakeholder: South African Police Service.
Relevant system actors: Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation; municipal police services; Crime Intelligence; Independent Police Investigative Directorate.
Policy and advisory actors: National Anti-Corruption Advisory Council; National Policing Advisory Committee if established.
Oversight and legislative actors: Parliament, particularly the Portfolio Committee on Police; provincial legislatures given the Bill’s proposed section 76 classification.
Potential future institutional interactions: Investigating Directorate Against Corruption and National Prosecuting Authority if NACAC’s proposed reallocation of corruption and commercial crime mandates is pursued.

Implementation challenges

Institutional culture: New statutory integrity and disciplinary mechanisms will have limited effect without leadership commitment and consistent enforcement.
Scale and complexity: The Bill covers a very wide range of policing functions, creating significant implementation demands across SAPS, the DPCI, municipal police services and community structures.
Integrity testing and lifestyle audits: Clear regulations, investigative capacity, privacy safeguards and consistent application will be necessary if these mechanisms are to be credible and lawful.
Disciplinary reform: Dedicated disciplinary units could improve consistency and professionalism, but effectiveness will depend on staffing, training, case management and protection from internal interference.
DPCI mandate uncertainty: B18-2026 reforms aspects of DPCI governance while wider proposals envisage a substantially narrower DPCI mandate. These processes may eventually require further legislative amendment.
Crime intelligence governance: A clearer statutory framework is important, but it will not by itself address longstanding concerns about leadership, vetting, corruption and operational accountability.
Municipal policing capacity: Expanded responsibilities will require consistent training, funding, standards and oversight across municipalities with very different levels of institutional capacity.
Community policing structures: New statutory arrangements must avoid creating additional bureaucracy without improving cooperation between police and communities.
Public order policing: Stronger legal rules must be accompanied by appropriate training, command systems, equipment and operational doctrine.
Constitutional compliance: Search powers, use of force, public gathering provisions, integrity measures and disciplinary processes must remain consistent with constitutional rights and judicial precedent.
Resourcing: New committees, specialised units, disciplinary structures, integrity systems and expanded municipal policing responsibilities will all have financial and personnel implications.

Connections to other reforms

Related reform	Relationship
IDAC and NPA reform	NACAC proposes transferring responsibility for serious corruption and serious commercial crime from the DPCI to IDAC, which would materially change the investigative architecture currently reflected in the SAPS Act.
Office of Public Integrity and Anti-Corruption	Wider anti-corruption restructuring could change coordination and case allocation between SAPS, DPCI, IDAC and a future central integrity institution.
IPID reform	Stronger independent police oversight complements the Bill’s internal integrity, disciplinary and accountability mechanisms.
NPA reform	Police investigative capacity and prosecutorial effectiveness are closely linked, particularly in organised crime, corruption and complex commercial cases.
Whistleblower protection	Stronger protections could improve reporting of police corruption and misconduct, including disclosures by SAPS members themselves.
Criminal justice coordination	NACAC’s proposed Case Management Committee would create a formal mechanism for allocating complex corruption, commercial crime and organised crime cases across SAPS, DPCI, IDAC and other institutions.

What to watch

Progress of B18-2026 through the Portfolio Committee on Police and the timetable for public participation.
Possible strengthening of the Bill’s provisions on integrity testing and lifestyle audits following concerns raised by the Portfolio Committee.
The final powers, composition and independence of the proposed National Policing Advisory Committee.
Possible changes to leadership appointment and accountability provisions in response to evidence emerging from the Madlanga Commission and parliamentary investigations.
The scope and safeguards governing municipal public order policing and any parliamentary proposals to expand municipal investigative powers.
The future division of responsibility between the DPCI and IDAC for organised crime, serious corruption and serious commercial crime.
Constitutional scrutiny of provisions affecting use of force, investigations, privacy, discipline and public gatherings.
Costing and institutional capacity for implementing the Bill’s extensive new structures and functions.

Implementation outlook

The SAPS reform process has moved decisively beyond policy development. B18-2026 is now formally before Parliament, giving legislators and the public an opportunity to examine a detailed statutory overhaul rather than a broad reform intention.

The Bill addresses many genuine weaknesses in the existing framework. Its professionalisation, integrity and disciplinary provisions are especially important given the current crisis of public confidence in policing. The proposed National Policing Advisory Committee could also create a more systematic source of expertise on recruitment, promotion, training and professional standards.

The reform nevertheless has significant limitations. B18-2026 does not resolve the larger debate over the architecture of corruption and organised crime investigation. NACAC’s proposal to separate the DPCI’s organised crime function from IDAC’s corruption and commercial crime mandate would fundamentally reshape the institutional model and could require substantial further amendments to the SAPS Act.

The political and institutional context has also changed sharply since the Bill was drafted. The Madlanga Commission, parliamentary investigations and continuing revelations concerning police corruption have intensified pressure for stronger statutory safeguards. Parliament has already signalled that it intends to scrutinise the Bill’s integrity provisions closely.

The immediate question is therefore no longer whether the SAPS Act overhaul will reach Parliament. It has. The next test is whether the parliamentary process produces legislation that not only modernises the existing Act but materially strengthens police integrity, professional leadership, internal accountability and operational effectiveness.

Sources and useful documents

Legislation and parliamentary material

South African Police Service Amendment Bill [B18-2026]
The full Bill introduced in the National Assembly on 10 June 2026. This is the primary source for assessing the actual content of the proposed reforms.
View South African Police Service Amendment Bill

Parliament of South Africa – South African Police Service Amendment Bill [B18-2026]
Official parliamentary Bill page recording its introduction, sponsor and current legislative stage.
View parliamentary Bill page

South African Government – South African Police Service Amendment Bill: Explanatory Summary, 5 December 2025
Official gazetted notice announcing the Minister’s intention to introduce the Bill and summarising its proposed scope.
View Explanatory Summary

South African Police Service Act 68 of 1995
The principal statute governing the establishment, organisation, regulation and control of SAPS.
View SAPS Act

Parliamentary oversight

Portfolio Committee on Police – SAPS Amendment Bill presents opportunity to strengthen police integrity and capacity, 5 August 2026
Records the committee’s first substantive consideration of B18-2026 and its initial concerns regarding integrity testing, lifestyle audits, municipal policing and community policing.
View Portfolio Committee statement

Government policy

Civilian Secretariat for Police Service – National Policing Policy, June 2025
Sets out the national policy framework for professional, accountable and effective policing and provides an important policy foundation for the SAPS legislative reforms.
View National Policing Policy

Anti-corruption institutional reform

National Anti-Corruption Advisory Council – Final Report 2025
Proposes substantial restructuring of the mandates of the DPCI and IDAC and the creation of a National Police Board. These proposals are important to the wider reform context but are not contained in B18-2026.
View NACAC Final Report

Civil society and independent analysis

Institute for Security Studies – Strengthening the SAPS for a safer South Africa: recommendations for police reform
Provides a broader evidence-based reform agenda addressing leadership, accountability, professionalisation, investigative capacity and institutional performance.
View ISS analysis

Institute for Security Studies – National commissioner must lead on tackling SA police corruption, 10 March 2026
Examines the importance of SAPS leadership and internal organisational responsibility in addressing systemic police corruption.
View ISS analysis

Corruption Watch – A year after Mkhwanazi allegations jolted authorities into action, progress is slow, 6 July 2026
Civil society analysis of the police corruption crisis and the institutional issues being examined by the Madlanga Commission and Parliament.
View Corruption Watch analysis