Calls for Lesufi’s removal after Gauteng Crime Prevention Wardens disbanded

DA Gauteng leader Solly Msimanga announced in a media briefing on Thursday, 23 October 2025, “The DA will table a motion of no confidence against Premier Lesufi for his reckless and irresponsible implementation of the failed amaPanyaza project.”

Gauteng’s Crime Prevention Wardens (CPWs) are commonly known as “amaPanyaza”. 

“The time for lies, deception and exploiting the plight of thousands of desperate job seekers in Gauteng must come to an end. This is the end of the road for Premier Lesufi,” the party said.

When asked by Daily Maverick on Thursday afternoon when the motion might be tabled, Msimanga responded: “We have submitted the motion today, and it will therefore be up to the speaker to then decide when this motion will be tabled in the house. But we expect that it should be done in the next two weeks.”

The ANC leads a minority coalition in Gauteng, but with the informal support of the MK party and EFF, has so far governed without significant disruption or opposition.

Unlawful

Since the establishment of the CPWs in early 2023, there has been criticism that they were unlawful. In August 2023, Daily Maverick reported that a law enforcement function could be assigned to “peace officers”, as planned by Lesufi, but that the justice minister first needed to give permission. 

That didn’t initially happen in the case of amaPanyaza, although they were granted peace officer status in December 2023.

Read more: Gauteng’s Crime Prevention Wardens were set up unlawfully, risk abuse of police powers – experts

At the time, Lesufi and the Gauteng government strenuously defended the decision to establish the crime prevention unit. 

Read more: Gauteng Crime Prevention Wardens – Premier Panyaza Lesufi responds to Daily Maverick’s reporting

In a report released this week, however, Public Protector Kholeka Gcaleka concluded that the CPWs were not lawfully established.

According to the Public Protector, the deployment of amaPanyaza was unlawful in that it was in violation of Section 41(1)(f) and (g) of the Constitution, which prohibits government entities from assuming powers not granted to them or encroaching on the functions of another sphere of government. 

Under Section 206(4) of the Constitution, provinces are not empowered to police and do not wield such authority. Gcaleka said their establishment and deployment to conduct policing operations with SAPS without legal authority was irregular, unlawful and inconsistent with the law.

In his parliamentary deliberations stemming from his infamous 6 July press briefing, KwaZulu-Natal police commissioner General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi disputed the legality of the crime wardens, stating that the provincial crime-fighting unit was illegally constituted.

Hours before the Public Protector report was released, Lesufi announced the CPWs would be disbanded.

Lesufi’s new plan

Speaking on Wednesday, Lesufi defended the CPWs, saying they “played a critical role in visible policing in the Johannesburg CBD, major events and township areas”.

The premier said that following questions over amaPanyaza’s legal legitimacy, the 8,800 CPWs would be disbanded over 36 months and integrated into the Gauteng Traffic Police, a recommendation in the Public Protector’s report. 

Lesufi said those who didn’t qualify would be reassigned to municipalities or government departments. While Daily Maverick was unable to establish who qualified for a job in the Gauteng Traffic Police, the CPWs’ main qualifying criteria included having a Grade 10-12 certificate. The Johannesburg Metro Police Department, meanwhile, requires applicants to hold a matric certificate or an equivalent.

Read more: Whistleblower says Gauteng crime prevention wardens are unprepared and unqualified

Parties react

While the provincial government had not yet responded to our enquiry on how much amaPanyaza had currently cost, the DA’s Msimanga said the cost ran into the billions.

“We are estimating that the cost of this exercise is way above R1.5-billion and still growing. But we are not looking at this only from what would’ve been paid in salaries/stipends, uniforms, vehicles, ‘training’ etc, but we are also looking at the lawsuits against the amaPanyazas which are still pending,” Msimanga said.

Read more: Victim allegedly assaulted by Gauteng Crime Prevention Wardens recovering after free medical treatment

“We are looking at the true cost and impact on NGOs that found themselves without much-needed funding when money meant for them was redirected to illegally fund the programme,” said Msimanga.

The DA said the party had been vindicated by the decision to disband the amaPanyaza.

“The DA is not surprised by his (Lesufi's) U-turn because we have consistently warned that amaPanyaza was a political gimmick to enhance the ANC’s chances in the 2024 national and provincial elections,” the party said.

The party called Lesufi arrogant for failing to heed concerns over the legality of the crime wardens. The party also accused Lesufi of pursuing political gain and preying on vulnerable job-seekers in Gauteng.

“The public dispute over whether the unit is lawful undermined confidence in its operations. When senior police officials raise the alarm, it signals governance failure,” the party said.

ActionSA, meanwhile, said the disbandment of the crime wardens was an admission that the effort had failed to curb crime. 

“ActionSA will closely monitor the implementation of this transition and hold the government to account. The promise of safer streets cannot be reduced to slogans – real work, clear governance and measurable outcomes are required,” the party said.

The EFF said, “Premier Lesufi must stop hiding behind phased implementation plans, admit his failure, and be held accountable for this waste of public funds.

The party welcomed “the long-overdue decision” by Lesufi “to disband the so-called Crime Prevention Wardens, a reckless, illegal and politically motivated experiment that has now collapsed under the weight of its own corruption and incompetence”.

Expert view

Independent researcher and policing expert David Bruce said, “The idea behind the Gauteng Crime Prevention Wardens was, in some ways, a reasonable idea. Many middle-class areas in South Africa enjoy decent levels of safety not only because of the SAPS, but because of the role played by private security.

“The GCPWs were intended to support safety in areas which do not have access to the services of private security identified by the Gauteng government as Tish (township, informal settlement and hostel) areas. The fact that the Gauteng government tried to put in place measures to strengthen safety in these areas is in some respects commendable.

“Unfortunately, the Gauteng provincial government didn’t properly consider what they were doing. They did not clarify the legal basis for what they were doing. They also did not address issues to do with the infrastructure that they would need to select, train, manage and discipline an entity of this kind.

“They had very ambitious and unrealistic ideas about the role that the wardens would perform. The safety of the wardens is also something that they should have considered more carefully when they were planning this,” Bruce said. 

Further initiatives of this kind should look at models for auxiliary policing that had been developed in other countries, he said, “such as police community support officers in the United Kingdom”.

“Another model is the Law Enforcement Advancement Programme in Cape Town (Leap), but there are many other possible approaches.” DM