The principle of the right to strike is Internationally recognised. Although the right to strike is not set out explicitly in the International Labour Organizations (ILO) Conventions and Recommendations. It has been discussed on several occasions in the International Labour Conference during the course of preparatory work on instruments dealing with related topics, but for various reasons this has never given rise to international standards (Conventions or Recommendations) directly governing the right to strike. The ILO has determined that the right to strike can be derived from the right to Freedom of Association. The ILO Committee does however recognises certain limitations on the right to strike such as not finding any objection to national legislation that would prohibit the right to strike of armed or police forces. Both the Committee on Freedom of Association and the Committee of experts were also mindful, where public servants are concerned, that the recognition of the right to association of public servants in no way prejudges the question of the right of public servants to strike. The ILO also makes provision for the establishment of essential services as to ensure the continuation of services were the interruption of such would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. In this limitation it however holds that a “minimum safety service” may be imposed to ensure the safety of persons, the prevention of accidents and the safety of machinery and equipment In our Constitution, the supreme law of the Country, the right to strike is enshrined and protected in section 23 under the bill of rights. The Constitution however allows enabling legislation, under specific circumstances, to limit a right listed in section 23. The Labour Relations Act (LRA) places a limitation on the right to strike, specifically providing that no person may take part in a strike if that person is engaged in an essential service. Because the right to strike is so important, a limitation of these kind needs to be justified and, to be justified it needs, among other things, to be limited. In section 72 of the LRA provision is made for a minimum service within a designated essential service. Therefore, the ambit of the designated essential service is shrunk to the minimum service and those employees who were denied the right to strike while the broader essential service designation was in place, but who fall outside the defined minimum service, regains the right to strike. The concept of minimum services has however became a matter of regular discussion and debate. The concept of minimum services is not defined to the letter but it is regarded as the minimum service an industry or workplace would require as to ensure interruption of services would not endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. Our legislatures have also been grappling with the concept of essential and minimum services. They have developed a comprehensive set of amendments trying to address some of the concerns in the composition, powers and functions of the Essential Services Committee (ESC). It is debatable if these proposed amendments would bring forth the necessary change to address these concerns or just become a further bureaucratic hindrance and due to the extreme complexity may even pose a limitation on the right to strike. There is also no differentiation made in the current labour legislation and the proposed amendments, between the public service and the private sector in application of the principle of essential and minimum services. Implementation of these principles in the public services has shown to be extremely challenging. Part of the proposed amendments however makes provision for the specific inclusion of government in the composition of the ESC. It is viewed by the drafters, that the introduction of government nominees to be an innovation to ensure that government is adequately represented on the essential services committee in its capacity as an employer, as a high proportion of essential service matters occur within the public service. This may be viewed as contrary to International standards as the ILO makes clear provision for a differentiated interpretation of the right to freedom of association, the right to strike, essential services and minimum services for people performing functions in the name of the State (public servants). The concept of public servant varies considerably from one country to another. Germany within their governance structure makes provision for a differentiation between civil servants and public servants and the labour rights the two groups may have. In France the military, police and prison services does not have the right to strike. In India public service employees have very limited organising and collective bargaining rights. In Brazil the police and the military do not have the right to strike and there are no legal provisions concerning the right to strike for civil servants. This is in strong contrast with the South African model. The South African Constitution and National Legislation does not allow for a differentiation in the application of labour legislation in the public service and the private sector. The application of the principles of labour relations and more specifically that of the right to strike and the determination of essential services must differ in the public services from that of the private sector. The public service is unique in that when workers in strike action it is not a purely defined labour process between an employer and employees but the public at large becomes a third player within the process. When public servants engage in industrial action they do not only deprive the community of certain rights, but indirectly deprive themselves from the same rights. There has been a resistant fear to implement the provisions of minimum services within the designated essential services within the public service, mainly because of the challenges in conceptualization of the practical implementation of the same. The environment created by the LRA does not specifically provide for the unique circumstances of the public service. The right to strike is a fundamental right for workers and therefore public servants won’t forfeit such. There is a recognition that the State needs to deliver services which will necessitate the application of the principle of essential services. However the answer will be in how minimum services is determined within these essential services. An answer that may not necessarily be contained within the Labour Relations Act.

The advent of a political democracy in South Africa in 1994 generated hope for a better life for all South Africans especially those marginalised during the apartheid era. The newly formed democratic government was confronted with the mammoth task of expounding and decreeing policies and processes that would warrant equality and equity in the provision of basic services to its citizens. Local government being the third sphere of government and which is closest to the people was entrusted with the responsibility of rendering basic services to its people as well as to address the backlogs that have accumulated during the apartheid era as depicted in the 1996 Constitution. Despite the efforts made by government to meet the requirements of the people in providing them with adequate basic services such as clean water, electricity, roads housing and refuse removal, these services were either not provided at all or it was done at a snail‟s pace. This led to widespread service delivery protests. In light of the above, this empirical study investigates the causes of the service delivery protests in City of Johannesburg (CoJ) from 2009 until 2014. Numerous studies have been pursued to examine the reasons and causes for service delivery protests and the conclusions derived is the slow pace of providing electricity, water and sanitation to the local communities. It therefore can be deduced that no democracy can subsist and prosper if citizens are still living in deprivation and in a state of discrimination and unemployment without them having visions for a better life. The manifestation of service delivery protests is thus a risk to South Africa‟s young democracy and its sustainability, which cannot be ignored. The findings of this study clearly revealed that communities in the CoJ are discontented and disgruntled because of, amongst other things, the lack of delivery of basic services, the deployment of cadres to municipal management positions, the abuse of the tendering system, nepotism and favouritism, which have negatively affected service delivery. / Public Administration and Management / M. Admin. (Public Administration)

MA.CRM / Department of Criminal Justice / The policing response to increasing violent community violent protests in South Africa has received global attention in the last decade. The study was conducted with a backdrop of increased concern over skirmish and sporadic fighting and violence during service delivery protests. Criticisms have been voiced by various role-players in violent protests concerning arrests, injuries and killing of civilians by police during these demonstrations. Hence the study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of POP strategies in curbing common acts of violence during violent protests particularly in Vuwani area of Vhembe District, Limpopo Province. The study adopted a mixed methods (qualitative and quantitative method). Purposive sampling was used to select POP officials wherein Focus Group Discussions (FGD) were conducted in 9 difference POP units, each FGD was comprised of approximately 5 members which total to 45 POP members. A total of 200 questionnaires were randomly distributed to community members of Vuwani within 5 were found invalid. Quantitative Data was analysed using Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) and qualitative data was analysed using thematic analysis. The findings indicated that (86,2%) of participants believed that Vuwani protest was caused by municipal demarcation issues. The favourite methods of protests include littering with (80,0 %) and burning tyres with (76,4%) of participants. A total of (52,8%) community members argued that police presence perpetuate violence during service delivery protest. Common crimes that occurred during the protests was vandalism with (82,6%) and arson with (81,0%). Furthermore, (83,6%) community members agrees that rubber bullets was used as a strategy by the police at Vuwani protests. The overwhelming majority of participants with 80,0% believe that negotiation during protests can curb death and injuries. On the other hand, the study finds that POP official strategies start by negotiating with the protestors, identifying the leader, use of water cannon, tear gas and rubber bullets as the last resort. Further emphasized that lack of manpower and resources are barriers that hinders effective policing of violent service delivery protests. It is therefore recommended that provision of resource and recruitment of manpower should be taken as a first priority by the SAPS national office. Lastly, the public should be educated about police presence during violent service delivery protests. / NRF