WHY IS CRIME IN SOUTH AFRICA SO VIOLENT? Updated Rapid Evidence Assessment on Violent Crime in South Africa

Full text

WHY IS CRIME IN SOUTH AFRICA SO VIOLENT?
Updated Rapid Evidence Assessment on Violent Crime in South Africa
March 2016
Guy Lamb and Giselle Warton
Safety and Violence Initiative
University of Cape Town

2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PROJECT INFORMATION AND METHODOLOGY ......................................................................... 7
1.1. Background ........................................................................................................................ 7
1.2. Specific Objectives ............................................................................................................. 8
1.3. Project Scope and Content ................................................................................................ 8
1.4. Review of Existing Research .............................................................................................. 8
2. THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF VIOLENT CRIME IN SOUTH AFRICA ............................................. 9
2.1. Definitions ......................................................................................................................... 9
2.2. Common Risk Factors for Violent Crime in South Africa .................................................. 11
2.2.1. Historical and Political Antecedents ......................................................................... 11
2.2.2. Socio-Economic Factors............................................................................................ 12
2.2.3. Socio-Cultural Factors .............................................................................................. 13
2.2.4. Gender, Age and Previous Victimization .................................................................. 13
2.2.5. Substance Use/ Misuse ............................................................................................ 14
2.2.5.1. Legislation and Interventions to Address Substance Abuse ............................. 15
2.2.5.1.1. The Liquor Act ............................................................................................... 15
2.2.5.1.2. Prevention of and Treatment for Substance Abuse Act ................................ 15
2.3. Categories of Violent Crime in South Africa ..................................................................... 15
2.3.1. Homicide/ Murder ................................................................................................... 15
2.3.2. Attempted Murder and Aggravated Robbery .......................................................... 16
2.3.3. Common Assault and Assault GBH ........................................................................... 19
2.3.4. Sexual Violence ........................................................................................................ 19
3. DIFFERENT FORMS OF VIOLENT CRIME IN SOUTH AFRICA ...................................................... 20
3.1. Child Maltreatment and Youth Violence.......................................................................... 20
3.1.1. Legislative Framework ............................................................................................. 20
3.1.1.1. The Children’s Act ............................................................................................ 20
3.1.1.2. The Social Assistance Act .................................................................................. 20
3.1.1.3. The Education Laws Amendment Act ............................................................... 21
3.1.1.4. The Sexual Offences Act ................................................................................... 21
3.1.1.5. The Domestic Violence Act ............................................................................... 21
3.1.2. Violence in the Home ............................................................................................... 22
3.1.3. Violence in Schools .................................................................................................. 23
3.1.4. Violence against Vulnerable Groups of Children ...................................................... 23
3.1.4.1. Children with Disabilities .................................................................................. 23

3
3.1.4.2. Children Living on the Streets ........................................................................... 24
3.1.4.3. Orphans and Child-Headed Households ........................................................... 24
3.2. Violence against Women ................................................................................................. 24
3.2.1. Individual Level Risk Factors .................................................................................... 25
3.2.2. Relationship Level Risk Factors ................................................................................ 26
3.2.3. Community and Societal Level Risk Factors ............................................................. 27
3.3. Firearm Crime and Violence............................................................................................. 27
3.3.1. Firearm Murder/Homicide ....................................................................................... 27
3.3.2. Firearms and Non-Fatal Violence against Women and Children .............................. 28
3.3.3. Illegal/Unlawful Possession of Firearms and Ammunition ....................................... 28
3.3.4. Link between Firearms Control and Firearm Violence.............................................. 29
3.4. Police Violence ................................................................................................................ 30
3.4.1. Deaths as a Result of Police Shootings ..................................................................... 30
3.4.2. Police Homicides ...................................................................................................... 30
3.5. Gang Violence .................................................................................................................. 31
3.5.1. Gang Violence on the ‘Cape Flats’ ............................................................................ 31
3.5.2. Youth Involvement in Gangs .................................................................................... 32
3.6. Collective Violence .......................................................................................................... 32
3.6.1. Vigilante Violence .................................................................................................... 32
3.6.2. Xenophobic Violence ............................................................................................... 33
3.6.3. Protest Violence ....................................................................................................... 34
3.7. Transport Violence (Taxi Violence) .................................................................................. 36
4. EFFECTIVENESS OF VIOLENCE PREVENTION LEGISLATION, POLICIES AND INTERVENTIONS .... 36
4.1. Evidence-Based Interventions ......................................................................................... 36
4.2. Primary Prevention Interventions ................................................................................... 37
4.2.1. Violence Prevention through Urban Upgrading (VPUU) ........................................... 37
4.2.2. SASA! (Start, Awareness, Support, Action) Activist Kit ............................................. 37
4.2.3. ‘Soul City’ Intervention ............................................................................................ 37
4.2.4. Sonke Gender Justice’s ‘One Man Can’ (OMC) Campaign ........................................ 38
4.2.5. Stepping Stones ....................................................................................................... 38
4.2.6. Intervention with Microfinance for AIDS and Gender Equity (IMAGE) ..................... 38
4.2.7. ‘Respect for U’ ......................................................................................................... 38
4.2.8. School Safety Guidelines .......................................................................................... 39
4.2.9. Bullying Interventions in Schools ............................................................................. 39
4.3. Secondary and Tertiary Interventions.............................................................................. 40
4.3.1. Domestic Violence and Child Abuse Screening at Health Centres ............................ 40

4
4.3.2. Parenting Programmes ............................................................................................ 40
4.3.3. Bystander Intervention Programmes ....................................................................... 40
4.3.4. Thuthuzela Care Centres .......................................................................................... 41
4.3.5. Sexual Offence Courts .............................................................................................. 42
4.3.6. Law Enforcement ..................................................................................................... 42
5. CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................... 43
BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................................. 45

5

6
Acronyms
BAC Blood Alcohol Content
CDG Child Dependency Grant
CJCP Centre for Justice and Crime Prevention
CSG Child Support Grant
CSVR Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation
DBE Department of Basic Education
DJ&CD Department of Justice and Constitutional Development
DOH Department of Health
DV Domestic Violence
DVA Domestic Violence Act
ECD Early Childhood Development
FCA Firearms Control Act
GBH Grievous Bodily Harm
GBV Gender Based Violence
IP Intimate Partner
IPFA Illegal Possession of Fire Arms
IPV Intimate Partner Violence
ISS Institute for Security Studies
MCCW Mother and Child Community Workers
MRC Medical Research Council
NIMSS National Injury Mortality Surveillance System
PAGAD People Against Gangsterism and Drugs
REA Rapid Evidence Assessment
SAPS South African Police Services
SOA Sexual Offenses Act
SOC Sexual Offences Courts
TCC's Thuthuzela Care Centres
UNODC United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime
VAC Violence Against Children
VAW Violence Against Women

7
WHO World Health Organisation
1. PROJECT INFORMATION AND METHODOLOGY
1.1. Background
Reported violent crime is higher is South Africa than in most other countries. This includes the rates
of murder, rape, aggravated assault, robbery, other property crime, and vehicle hijackings. Violent
crime, therefore, presents a major challenge for policy makers and those responsible for making South
Africa a country in which “all people in South Africa are and feel safe” (Office of the Presidency,
2010)[1].
In May 2011, A Rapid Evidence Assessment (REA) was undertaken by Philip Davies and Kristen
MacPherson of Oxford Evidentia to examine the research literature on ‘why crime in South Africa is
so violent?’ The report highlighted that there are multiple and inter-connected factors contributing to
the high levels of violent crime in the country. Single factor explanations that attribute the degree of
violence in South Africa solely to poverty, unemployment, inequality and the diminished life chances
of many South Africans were mooted as being untenable. Consistent evidence that socio-economic
disadvantage is associated with both criminal activity in general and violent crime in particular was
revealed [2]–[4]. Additionally, however, it was noted that there are many other countries in Africa,
and the rest of the world, that have comparable, and even worse, socio-economic conditions than
South Africa. These countries, however, do not experience the same level or degree of either crime or
violence. Further, the research indicated that some of the violence in South Africa takes place in
private, domestic situations that are not always reported, and are not confined to poor communities
[3].
The study categorised the most generally accepted factors contributing to violent crime as follows:
unfavourable socio-economic conditions (including undocumented immigration), cultural attitudes to
crime and violence, the presence of facilitating contributors (e.g. firearms, drugs and alcohol) and
inadequate regulatory systems [5], [6].
Louw (2007) was cited as observing that ‘’These risk factors are by no means unique to South Africa
and are drawn upon to explain crime worldwide. Although some are more pronounced in South Africa,
high crime levels no doubt exist because almost all the risk factors prevail here, whereas other
countries tend to be affected by only a few’’ [6, p. 244].
The link between socio-economic disadvantage and crime, including violent crime, in South Africa (or
elsewhere) was explicated, with Seedat et al, 2009 having pointed out that:
‘’A detailed analysis of the relation between socio-economic inequalities and violence, based
on survey data from 63 countries, shows that income inequality (measured by the Gini
coefficient), low economic development, and high levels of gender inequity are strong positive
predictors of rates of violence, including homicides and major assaults. South Africa had the
worst income inequality and the highest rate of homicide of the 63 countries studied’’. Seedat
et al, observed further that although “poverty and inequality are crucial social dynamics that
have contributed to South Africa’s burden of violent injury, they are inseparably related to
other key drivers, such as the dominant patriarchal constructions of masculinity, the
intergenerational cycling of violence, alcohol, and drug misuse, and the proliferation of
firearms” [7, p. 1014].

8
The range of explanations of violence in South Africa were conceptualised in the 2011 REA report in
terms of political-historical factors, environmental factors and individual factors. The 2011 REA also
provided a relatively short assessment of promising violence prevention interventions in South Africa.
1.2. Specific Objectives
The objective of this assignment is to update the REA undertaken by Oxford Evidentia on ‘why crime
in South Africa is so violent’, and to assess the effectiveness of violence prevention legislation, policies
and interventions. The literature review must be updated and the gaps identified, especially in relation
to the indicators in the World Health Organisation’s Global Status Report on Violence Prevention
(2014), such as gender-based violence literature, amongst others, should be included.
1.3. Project Scope and Content
This REA has included documents that meet the following criteria:
- Studies focused on a population of South African citizens, undocumented migrants and refugees.
- Studies focused on a South African context.
- Studies that apply to contemporary South Africa – where possible studies published from 2000.
- Studies investigating reasons (associated risk factors) for violent crime.
- Interventions seeking to prevent various forms of violence in South Africa.
- Studies involving various types of violent crime, including (but not limited to): violence against
women and children; youth violence; gang violence; collective violence (including vigilantism,
xenophobic violence and protest violence); sexual violence; violence in schools; violence against
orphans, children with disabilities and street children; masculinity and violence; firearm violence;
and transport (taxi) violence.
- Studies in English.
1.4. Review of Existing Research
Documents that met the scope of this project were identified by systematically searching electronic
databases. The scientific databases from which studies were identified included:
- ArticleFirst
- Taylor and Francis Journals
- SA ePublication Journal Collection
- MEDLINE/PubMed
- CrossRef
- Wiley Online Library
- Elsevier
- JSTOR Arts & Sciences VII Collection
- Emerald Publishing Group Limited
- Index to South African Periodicals (ISAP)
Initial search terms used included the search terms used to identify documents for the previous REA.
This enabled identification of studies and literature relating to these terms, which were published
after 2011, hereby allowing comparison of findings published pre- and post- 2011. Additional search
terms were included to address the specific scope of the REA. Search terms included:
- ‘Violen* AND crim* AND South Africa’ AND expla*’, ‘factor*’, ‘reason*’; 'South Africa' AND ‘violent
crimes’, ‘crime causes theory’; 'South Africa' AND ‘psychological victimi*ation effects’ ‘bullying’,
‘bully*’; ‘aggression’; ‘brutality’.
- ’Violen* AND crim* AND South Africa’ AND: 'foreign criminal justice’, ‘criminology’; ‘social
conditions’, ‘urban area studies’, ‘crime measurement’; political influences’, ‘politically motivated
violent crimes’; ‘cultural influences’; ‘socio-economic’; ‘childhood’, ‘age’; ‘gender’; ‘school*’;
‘socialisation’; ‘firearms’, ‘gun control’; ‘gang*’; ‘tsotsi’; ‘organized crime’; ‘taxi’; ‘taxi wars’; ‘taxi

9
violence’; ‘vigilant*’; ‘mob justice’; ‘protest violence’; ‘public violence’; ‘xenophob*’; ‘refugee’;
‘asylum seeker*’; ‘migrant’; ‘drug*’; ‘substance misuse/abuse’; ‘alcohol’; ‘sexual violence’; ‘sexual
offense*’; ‘rape’; ‘weapons’.
Material accessed included qualitative and quantitative work in the form of peer-reviewed journal
articles, reports, working documents, presentations and unpublished theses. The reference lists of
retrieved studies were used to identify additional relevant research, as was expert knowledge of the
area. The identified studies were then evaluated against the scope of the rapid assessment to
determine their relevance and studies which met the gaps identified in the previous (2011) REA were
highlighted and analysed.
2. THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF VIOLENT CRIME IN SOUTH AFRICA
‘’The various forms of violence present in South Africa are inter-related and have common
causes. Violence, in its many forms, represents a fault-line to democracy and efforts to
understand, address and prevent it are required as a way to protect democracy [8, p. 5].’’
A large proportion of crime in South Africa is violent crime, and the level of violence involved in violent
crimes is often excessive and unnecessary in achieving the objectives of the criminal activity [9]–[11].
Violence was the primary cause of ‘’non-natural deaths’’ in South Africa in 2008 [12, p. vii]. The rates
of robbery, sexual violence and homicide are particularly high with certain areas bearing the brunt of
violent crime [13], [14]. Violence has become a normalized and accepted form of communication in
South African society, being seen as a legitimate means to resolve disputes and highlight issues [10],
[15], [16]. This is despite the fact that violence violates the fundamental values of the post-apartheid
state. Article 12 (1) (c) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act 108 of 1996, states:
‘’Everyone has the right to freedom and security of the person, which includes the right to be free
from all forms of violence from either public or private sources [15].’’ Unfortunately, for many in South
Africa this right is but a right on paper, with violence and the fear thereof being a daily reality [8], [17].
2.1. Definitions
Type of Violence
Definition
Source
Violence
‘’The intentional use of physical force
or power, threatened or actual,
against oneself, another person, or
against a group or community, that
either results in or has a high
likelihood of resulting in injury, death,
psychological harm, maldevelopment
or deprivation.’’
World Health Organization (WHO) [18,
p. 5]
Violent Crime
‘’Applications, or threats, of physical
force against a person, which can give
rise to criminal or civil liability,
whether severe or not and whether
with or without a weapon. When
more severe such violence may be
associated with intimate violations of
the person or the potential to cause
serious physical pain, injury or
death.’’
Centre for the Study of Violence and
Reconciliation (CSVR) [3, p. 33]
Interpersonal Violence
‘’…[V]iolence that occurs between
family members, intimate partners,
friends, acquaintances and strangers,
and includes child maltreatment,
youth violence (including that
WHO [19, p. 2]

10
associated with gangs), violence
against women (for example, intimate
partner violence and sexual violence)
and elder abuse.’’
Stranger Violence
Where the victim and perpetrator are
not acquainted.
CSVR [3]
Acquaintance Violence
Where the victim and perpetrator
know each other.
CSVR [3]
Homicide/ Murder
‘’…[T]he unlawful and intentional
killing of another human being.’’
Institute for Security Studies (ISS) [20]
Attempted Murder
‘’Attempted Murder consists in the
commission of an unlawful act with
the intention of killing another human
being but which does not result in the
death of that human being.’’
ISS [20]
Common Assault
‘‘[T]he unlawful and intentional – (1.)
Direct and indirect application of
force to the body of another person,
or; (2.) Threat of application of
immediate personal violence to
another, in circumstances in which
the threatened person is prevailed
upon to believe that the person who
is threatening him has the intention
and power to carry out his threat.’’
ISS [20]
Robbery
‘’…[T]he unlawful and intentional
removal of tangible property by
means of the threat or use of force.’’
UCT Centre of Criminology [21, p. 25]
Aggravated Robbery
‘’…[T]he unlawful and intentional
forceful removal and appropriation in
aggravating circumstances of
movable tangible property belonging
to another. Note: These cases are
specified (coded) either with the use
of a firearm or with a weapon other
than a firearm.’’
ISS [20]
Domestic Violence
“Physical abuse; sexual abuse;
emotional, verbal and psychological
abuse; economic abuse; intimidation;
harassment; stalking; damage to
property; entry into … residence
without consent, where the parties
do not share the same residence; or
any other controlling or abusive
behaviour…; where such conduct
harms, or may cause imminent harm
to, the safety, health or wellbeing of
the complainant”, and which occurs
“within a domestic relationship”.
Domestic Violence Act 116 of 1998
(DVA)
Intimate Partner Violence
“Any behaviour within an intimate
relationship that causes physical,
psychological or sexual harm to those
in the relationship. Such behaviour
includes: Acts of physical aggression –
such as slapping, hitting, kicking and
beating; Psychological abuse – such as
intimidation, constant belittling and
humiliating; Forced intercourse and
other forms of sexual coercion;
Various controlling behaviours – such
as isolating a person from their family
and friends, monitoring their
WHO [18, p. 89]

11
movements, and restricting their
access to information or assistance”.
Physical Abuse
“Any act or threatened act of physical
violence towards the complainant”.
DVA
Economic Abuse
“(a) The unreasonable deprivation of
economic or financial resources to
which a complainant is entitled under
law or which the complainant
requires out of necessity, including
household necessities for the
complainant, and mortgage bond
repayments or payment of rent in
respect of the shared residence; (b)
the unreasonable disposal of
household effects or other property
in which the complainant has an
interest”.
DVA
Emotional, verbal and psychological
abuse
“A pattern of degrading or humiliating
conduct… including (a) repeated
insults, ridicule or name calling; (b)
repeated threats to cause emotional
pain; or (c) the repeated exhibition of
obsessive possessiveness or jealousy,
which is such as to constitute a
serious invasion of… privacy, liberty,
integrity or security”.
DVA
Sexual Abuse
“Any conduct that abuses, humiliates,
degrades or otherwise violates the
sexual integrity of the complainant”.
DVA
Rape
“All forms of sexual penetration
without consent, irrespective of
gender”.
Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and
Related Matters) Amendment Act 32
of 2007 (SOA)
Sexual Assault
“All forms of sexual violation, without
consent”. This includes ‘’intentionally
inspir[ing] the belief’’ in an individual
that they ‘’will be sexually violated’’.
SOA
Collective Violence
‘’…[I]nstrumental use of violence by
people who identify themselves as
members of a group…against another
group or set of individuals, in order to
achieve political, economic or social
objectives.’’
WHO [18, p. 215]
2.2. Common Risk Factors for Violent Crime in South Africa
There are multiple inter-related risk factors which contribute to the high rates of violent crime in South
Africa. Historical factors such as colonialism and apartheid have left a legacy of violence [3]. In
addition, (a) socio-economic factors, such as high levels of unemployment, income inequality and
poverty [7], [21], [22]; and (b) entrenched socio-cultural norms such as norms around male control
and dominance [7], [23], [24], violent expressions of masculinity and male sexual entitlement [24]–
[27]; and (c) the use of violence to ‘resolve’ conflict; contribute to these high rates of violent crime.
Access to firearms, alcohol and drugs further facilitate and exacerbate this violence [7], [28].
Weaknesses in the criminal justice system and policing, as well as inadequate implementation of laws
and policies to address violence, have hampered effective prevention and response to this violence
[6], [17]. At the individual level, risk factors for perpetration of violence include gender; age; previous
violence victimization; lack of education (low levels of education); unemployment; and substance use
and abuse [6].
2.2.1. Historical and Political Antecedents

12
Under colonial rule, violence, or the threat thereof, was used to control and oppress Black people and
subdue insurrection from certain segments of the White population, particularly Afrikaners [29], [30].
The high levels of state sanctioned violence during colonial and apartheid rule, including police
brutality, the internal deployment of the military, torture, racial and gender discrimination, oppression
and dehumanisation, as well as the violence employed by the anti-apartheid liberation movements
are historical factors contributing to the high levels of violence we see in South Africa today [8], [9],
[29]–[31]. During apartheid, much of the legislation and the criminal justice system was oppressive
towards and discriminated against people of colour, and resistance against the government was
criminalised and systematically quashed. The inherently unjust and oppressive nature of the legal
system, during this time, contributed to a distrust and lack of confidence in the police and the criminal
justice system and a lack of respect for rule of law among many South Africans. This attitude towards
the law and the criminal justice system remains among many South Africans, despite the end of
apartheid. Lack of respect for rule of law is a significant contributor to the high rates of violent crime
in South Africa [3], [32].
The Influx Control Act 68 of 1986, the Group Areas Act 77 of 1957 and the forced removals under
apartheid contributed to disruption of traditional community and family systems and structures in
many Black African and Coloured communities, which consequently had a negative impact on youth
socialization (increasing the risk factors for and reducing the protective factors against youth
engagement in violent crimes) [3], [9], [33]. Similarly, violence was commonplace in urban, male-
dominated migrant labour communities, such as hostels. The colonial and apartheid governments,
while responding harshly to the perpetration of crime by Black people against White people, was loath
to effectively respond to violent crime in Black communities, and at times even actively fomented
violence [14], [29]. There were nonetheless police stations in such areas that provided a basic level of
service, but the police anticipated that their enforcement of apartheid laws and policies, combined
with ad hoc mass crime crackdowns in townships would have more significant crime control effects.
These factors facilitated the rise in violent crime in these communities. The high levels of violent crime
remains a key problem in these informal urban settlements [29].
2.2.2. Socio-Economic Factors
Poverty, unemployment, low levels of education and income inequality contribute to the high levels
of violent crime in South Africa [7], [34], [35]. South Africa has a Gini coefficient of 62.5, making it the
fourth most unequal country in the world [36]. Consequently, it has been argued that socio-economic
disadvantage and inequality has led to high levels of frustration and desperation among many South
Africans, which contributes to heightened levels of violence [3], [9]. Men who fall into the lowest
socio-economic income bracket, and those who are unemployed are more at risk of perpetrating
intimate partner violence (IPV) and femicide [35], [37], [38]. Lower levels of education are also strongly
associated with the perpetration of all types of violent crime.
The association between socio-economic factors and violence is reflected in the distribution of violent
crime across South Africa. As Lamb (2015) states:
‘’For the past two decades the SAPS crime statistics have consistently revealed the highly
uneven distribution of violent crime throughout South Africa. Overall crime has manifested
within most policing precincts, but violent crime has been intensely concentrated in around
15% of policing precincts. Most of the high crime places are densely populated and
infrastructurally marginalised with high levels of poverty, such as large urban townships and
informal settlements. In many of these places government authority has been undermined by
limited community trust in the police [13].’’

13
Bruce et al (2007) describes the differences between poor ‘’violence prone communities’’ and ‘’high
crime middle class communities’’ [3, p. 115]. In poorer communities the levels of acquaintance
violence – such as rape, assault and domestic violence (DV) – are generally much higher than in middle
class areas. Further, poorer communities have high levels of residential and business robberies,
burglaries as well street robberies. Middle class communities also have high levels of residential and
business robberies and burglaries, but vehicle hijackings are also a particular problem. The prevalence
of private security, better police resources and active neighbourhood watch organisations in middle
class neighbourhoods, may have assisted in reducing the number of burglaries. Homicide in poorer
areas is often as a result of violence between acquaintances, whereas homicide in more middle class
areas is often associated with robberies.
2.2.3. Socio-Cultural Factors
Patriarchal gender norms and the acceptance and normalization of violent expressions of masculinity
feed into the high prevalence of violence throughout the society [7], [11], [16]. Ideals and norms
around male power, control and dominance and male sexual entitlement are widespread. The
consequences of these deeply deviant expressions of masculinity are often ignored. Violence is deeply
embedded within the social fabric of the country, and has become normalized and widely accepted as
a means of dealing with frustration and conflict [10].
2.2.4. Gender, Age and Previous Victimization
Gender, age and previous victimization are key individual-level risk factors for violence victimization
and perpetration. Gender is strongly associated with violent crime in South Africa, with males
constituting the primary perpetrators of all forms of violence [3], [7], [39]. Further, gender appears to
be associated with risk for different forms of violence victimization. For example, men are overall at
greater risk for falling victim to physical violence and homicide, while women bear the brunt of sexual
and emotional violence [3], [12], [40], [41]. In the South African Police Service’s (SAPS) 2014/2015
crime statistics, of the 17 857 homicides in South Africa: 4.5% (804 cases) were children (under 18
years); 12.51% (2234 cases) were women; and 82.98% (14 819 cases) were men [41]. These statistics
highlight how men are significantly more likely to fall victim to homicide as compared to women and
children [3], [41]
In the case of children, girls are more likely to fall victim to sexual violence and are more likely to
report emotional violence victimization than boys [27], [42]–[45]. Boys are more likely to experience
physical violence in general, but both boys and girls are equally as likely to experience physical violence
at home. Overall, boys are at greater risk of homicide than girls, but girls are at greater risk of rape
homicide [46]. As with men, boys are significantly more likely to perpetrate all forms of violence.
There is also a correlation between age and forms of violence perpetration and victimization in South
Africa. Violence related deaths are highest in the 15 - 34 year age group (among males) [3], [12].
Further, experience of assault and robbery appears to be more common among younger people [3].
Perpetration of violent crime appears to be particularly high in the 16-25 year age category. This is
reflected by the number of unsentenced and sentenced prisoners held for violence offences, who fall
into the 18-25 year age category (perpetrators under 18 are placed in alternate facilities where
possible, as South African policy aims to protect children from incarceration) [3]. It appears that a high
proportion of violent offenders only perpetrate violent crimes for a short period of their overall
lifespan, which could be reflective of the high rate of violent offending in the 16-25 year age category
[3].
With regards to perpetration of violence against women (VAW), younger men (44 years and under)
are more likely to perpetrate sexual violence [sexual IPV and non-intimate partner (non-IP rape)] [24],
[27], [47]–[52], but age is not strongly correlated with perpetration of other forms of IPV. While

14
women and girls of all ages are targets for non-IP sexual violence, there is some evidence to suggest
that women in their twenties are at greatest risk [27], [53]. A study in Gauteng found that women (18
years and older) are at greater risk of gang rape and that the rape of a woman is more likely to involve
excessive violence [53].
Previous exposure/ experience of violence increases the likelihood for future victimization (among
males and females) [27], [54] and perpetration (particularly among males) [25]–[27], [42], [48], [55],
[56]. Among girls - experiencing repeated physical punishment, observing maternal IPV victimization,
and experiencing childhood sexual assault - are all strongly associated with increased risk for future
experience of IPV and non-IP sexual violence [27], [54]. Childhood abuse is one of the most significant
risk factors for future victimization [27], [37], [54], [55]. Children who experience violence in their
homes are at increased risk for experiencing violence in their schools and in their communities [42],
and those who have been victimized are more likely to become perpetrators of violence [42].
2.2.5. Substance Use/ Misuse
‘’Violence, alcohol misuse and mental disorders are inextricably linked and are leading
contributors to the burden of disease in South Africa, each in their own right but particularly
where they overlap to produce a perpetuating cycle of harmful outcomes [57, p. 103].’’
The abuse of substances, particularly ‘tik’ (crystal meth/ methamphetamine) and alcohol exacerbate
the high levels of poverty and violent crime in South Africa [58], [59]. The most commonly abused
substance in South Africa is alcohol [60], [61]. Alcohol ‘’remains the substance with the greatest
burden of harm’’ [61, p. 338]; including being strongly associated with homicide and other forms of
violence related injuries [28], [38], [62]. According to the 2007 National Injury Mortality Surveillance
System (NIMSS) data, blood alcohol concentration (BAC) levels were high in 57.7% of the homicide
cases where BAC levels had been tested [63]. Alcohol abuse is also strongly associated with male
perpetration of IPV, intimate partner femicide (IPF) and non-IP sexual violence [24]–[26], [48], [49],
[56], [59], [64]. Drinking alcohol is also associated with violence victimization. For instance, a Western
Cape study found that 62% of female homicide victims had high BAC levels when they died [38].
Explanations for the associations between alcohol abuse and violence include that alcohol can lead to
increased levels of aggression - although aggressive behaviour associated with drinking is significantly
more common in individuals with underlying aggressive behavioural traits [3], [57]. For instance,
alcohol and illicit drugs are sometimes used by robbers during robberies in order ‘’to suppress certain
aspects of emotional responsiveness, to heighten aggression, as well as to reduce inhibitions and self-
control and cloud judgement [3, p. 108].’’ Social mores around behaviour when drinking may condone
aggressive and violent behaviour in certain settings and conflict around a partner’s drinking is also
associated with violence in interpersonal relationships.
There is a lack of nationally representative studies that investigate the prevalence of illicit drug use
amongst perpetrators of violent crime. The most commonly abused illicit drug in South Africa is
cannabis. In the Western Cape, however, ‘tik’ has become the most widely abused drug [60]. Drug
use, particularly the use of ‘tik’, is associated with gang activity on the ‘Cape Flats’ – both in the trade
and use of the substance [61]. Gang related drug activity is characterised by violence, and is suggested
to be a core contributor to the particularly high rates of homicide in the Western Cape [3]. Drug use
is also associated with child abuse and gender-based violence (GBV) [58]. A number of studies have
found a strong association between drug use and perpetration of physical IPV and non-IP rape [24]–
[26], [34], [47], [49], [56], [59]. With regards to the perpetration of non-IP rape by drug users, context
plays a key role. Drug use is associated with unemployed, young men who often engage in anti-social

15
behaviour. Non-IP rape perpetration is often opportunistic, occurring in contexts that enable criminal
activities [49].
2.2.5.1. Legislation and Interventions to Address Substance Abuse
2.2.5.1.1. The Liquor Act
The Liquor Act 59 of 2003 regulates the advertising of alcohol
1
. Further, the alcohol industry is required
to abide by the Code of Commercial Communication of Alcohol Beverages – a code regulated by the
industry itself. Industries involved in manufacturing and advertising alcohol are required to develop
programmes to address the abuse of alcohol. Though well intended, this requirement likely conflicts
with alcohol industries business goals – that of maximizing demand for their product. Consequently,
it is not surprising that many of these programmes are not evidence-based and their efficacy and
relevance is questionable [65].
In order to address a variety of gaps in South Africa’s regulatory framework concerning alcohol, the
Department of Trade and Industry published recommendations for the amendment of the Liquor Act
in May 2015 [65]. These recommendations include: (a) enabling the Minister of Trade and Industry to
determine the restrictions on advertising of alcohol; (b) changing the minimum age of drinking from
18 years to 21 years (in order to deter heavy drinking among youth, with its numerous negative
consequences and associated risks); (c) stricter regulations regarding locations and times in which
alcohol can be sold, as well as the days on which it can be sold; and (d) creating a government managed
fund to address the problem of alcohol abuse, alcohol industries will be required to contribute to this
fund.
2.2.5.1.2. Prevention of and Treatment for Substance Abuse Act
The Prevention of and Treatment for Substance Abuse Act, which came into effect in 2013, aims to
comprehensively reduce the supply and demand for illicit drugs and alcohol. A shortfall of this Act is
that although it outlines the necessity of substance abuse prevention, early intervention and
rehabilitation services, it does not mandate any government department to create these programmes.
The efficacy of this Act, and whether it has been effectively implemented, is as yet unclear.
South Africa lacks sufficient rehabilitation services for individuals addicted to substances [61], [66].
Further, many existing substance abuse programmes are unaffordable for the majority of South
Africans. In order to effectively address substance abuse related violent crime, the country urgently
needs to develop accessible, evidenced-based preventative interventions and treatment programmes
for individuals who abuse substances [28], [61].
2.3. Categories of Violent Crime in South Africa
2.3.1. Homicide/ Murder
Homicide data is a relatively reliable indicator/ measure of the level of violent crime in a community
or society [9], [18], [21]. South Africa has the 9th highest recorded homicide rate, globally [40]. South
Africa’s homicide rate decreased by more than 50% between 1995 and 2011 from ‘’64.9 to 30.0 per
100,000 population’’ [40, p. 33]. Since the 2011/ 2012 SAPS national crime statistics reporting period,
however, there has been a slight increase in the murder rate [21]. The 2014/15 SAPS statistics
indicated a murder rate of 33 per 100,000 [21], [67]–[69]. In their analysis of these statistics, UCT
Centre of Criminology noted that while the murder increase has been small, it is noteworthy as ‘’it the
first increase of this kind in the history of the SAPS’’ [21, p. 22]. To date, no evidence-based
explanations for this recent increase in the murder have been provided.
1
Section 9 of the Liquor Act.

16
The modest research on homicide in South African indicates that over the past 20 years both the
victims and perpetrators of all forms of homicide in South Africa have mostly been young Black
(African and Coloured) men between the ages of 15 and 39. Such men are predominantly unmarried,
unemployed, live in relatively impoverished areas [70], [71], witnessed and/or experienced violence
as a child, and possibly possess an illegal firearm [72].
Women account for between 10% and 15% of homicide victims, with even fewer women perpetrating
homicide [73], [74]. These dynamics correspond with studies on homicide in other countries, which
demonstrates that young men in lower socio-economic situations are the most at risk of being both
the agents and targets of such violence [18], [75], [76].
Homicides in South Africa have often been the outcome of aggressive verbal disagreements in the
context of alcohol consumption [77], [78], or during the perpetration of another crime, such as
robbery. In some areas, gang rivalries may result in killings [79], [80].
An analysis of an unspecified number of murder dockets by SAPS that was presented in the SAPS
2002/03 annual report, indicated that 56% of murder cases reviewed had reportedly “started as an
argument which degenerated into a fight and then an [fatal] assault”. In addition, 28% of the
perpetrators in the assessed murder cases were family members, or were in an intimate relationship
with the victim, while 22% and 19% were friends and acquaintances of the victims respectively [81].
Similarly, a SAPS docket analysis of 9,623 murder dockets during the 2004/05 reporting year found
that 61.9% of perpetrators of murder were relatives, friends or acquaintances of the victims [82].
Further to this, an analysis by SAPS of 1,348 murder dockets from the 2007/08 reporting period
indicated that the main motives and circumstances associated with murder during that period had
been: misunderstandings or arguments (50.4% of dockets); consequences of other crimes (15.9% of
dockets); “domestic-related” (7.3% of dockets), and “jealousy/love-triangle” (5.5% of all dockets). This
study also found that alcohol abuse was a key contributing factor to murders [83].
Similar findings have been reported in subsequent SAPS annual reports, especially the 2010/11 report,
which stated that the Crime Research and Statistics component within SAPS Crime Intelligence had
estimated that over the previous ten year period that in some 70% and 80% of murder and 60% of
attempted murder cases, the victims and perpetrators were acquainted with one another prior to the
violent incident [84].
Homicide has typically transpired on the streets or in the homes of victims, and is more frequent on
weekend nights [78]. Studies have found that the availability of firearms significantly increased the
risk of the lethality of violence in such contexts in South Africa [71], [73], [85], [86].
The literature on masculinity and violence in South Africa suggests that the perpetration of homicide
is closely tied to notions of manhood that reveres dominant men that are “always ready for a fight,
never show fear, ignore pain, and play it cool.” Such a type of masculinity encourages bravado,
weapon-carrying, excessive drinking of alcohol and dramatically increases the risk of violent
confrontations between men and groups of men in public spaces [87, pp. 20–21]. The link between
this form of masculinity and homicide is intensified when men at risk of perpetrating violence live in
communities where there are high levels of interpersonal violence; and where firearms are easily
obtainable [88], [89].
2.3.2. Attempted Murder and Aggravated Robbery

17
Attempted murder entails the commission of a crime with the intention of killing another person, but
the actions of the perpetrator do not result in the death of the victim. In total there have been 335,043
cases of attempted murder with a firearm between 1994/1995 and 2013/2014 in South Africa [90],
[91]. This represents 70.2% of all attempted murders for that period.
Aggravated robbery is a category of robbery where the perpetrator is armed with a lethal weapon,
such as a firearm or knife, and where the victim suffers serious bodily harm as a result of the actions
of the perpetrator. In South Africa, car and truck hijackings, cash-in-transit heists and bank robberies
are also included in the category of aggravated robbery. In total there have been 490,859 cases of
robbery with a firearm
2
between 1996 and 2013/14 [90], [91].
Attempted murder and aggravated robbery, as a whole, are often regarded as “drivers” of the murder
rate in South Africa [92]. That is the violent dynamics of the interaction between victim and
perpetrator, as well as the injuries incurred, can significantly increase the risk of mortality for the
victims. However, as reflected in the chart below, the attempted murder and aggravated robbery rates
have not entirely emulated the homicide rate over the past 20 years.
More specifically the aggravated robbery rate increased from 1995/1996 to 2003/2004 by 76%, while
the murder rate, according to SAPS data, declined by 41% over the same period. After reviewing the
SAPS crime data for the period 1994/1995 to 2003/2004, Altbeker (2008) suggested that that this
apparent incongruence (in terms of aggravated robbery) was most likely due to “more accurate and
comprehensive recording of statistics” [93]. This is entirely possible, but with the advantage of an
additional ten years of data, congruence between the murder rate on the one hand and attempted
murder and aggravated robbery on the other does seem to materialise.
From 2003/2004 the aggravated robbery rate dropped by 31% over the next eight years, and generally
kept pace with the murder rate. After remaining fairly constant between 1994/1995 and 2001/2002
the attempted murder rate peaked in 2002/03 and then decreased by 63% between 2002/2003 and
2011/2012, which then also mirrors the declining murder rate. From 2011/2012 there has been a slight
increase in the murder rate, which is matched by upturns in both the attempted murder and
aggravated robbery rates.
The trend in the firearm homicide rate between 1995 and 2007 (as reported by the UNODC) reveals a
more consistent complementary relationship with attempted murder and aggravated robbery. That
is, the firearm homicide rate peaks in 1998 and then, as mentioned above, declines by 40% between
1998 and 2007. The principal reason for this is that firearms have extensively been used in cases of
attempted murder and aggravated robbery. That is, an average of 79.5% of attempted murder cases
between 1994 and 1998 entailed the use of a firearm [90], and according to SAPS, firearms have
generally been used in approximately 70% of all aggravated robberies [94].
Chart 1: Murder, attempted murder and aggravated robbery rate per 100,000: 1994/1995-2013/2014
2
Robbery with a firearm in this instance includes the following types of robbery where a firearm was reportedly used:
common robbery; business robbery; car hijacking; truck hijacking; cash-in-transit robbery; bank robbery and house
robbery.

18
Source: (SAPS), (UNODC)
A disaggregated analysis of some of the crimes categorised as aggravated robbery with a strong
association with firearm use, namely car hijackings and bank robberies, suggest that there is some
synergy between these types of crimes and the murder rate. That is, on average these types of crimes
declined significantly between 1998/99 and 2011/12. In terms of bank robberies, a possible
contributing factor to the declining number of this type of crime was that from 1997 the SAPS
established cooperative and integrated ventures with the banking sector in which: a database on bank
robberies was established; information about perpetrators and modus operandi were shared; and the
linking of police investigations to alleged perpetrators to crimes (and related crimes) was prioritised
[95, Sec. Briefing to the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Safety and Security], [96]. One of the
key SAPS operations in this regard was titled ‘Operation Greed’ in which “hot spots [were] identified
and proactive plans…put into operation to address specific crime trends” [97, p. 42].
Chart 2: Car hijacking rate: 1996-2013
Source: (SAPS)
Chart 3: Bank robberies and cash-in-transit robberies total reported cases: 1994/95-2014/15
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
1994/95
1995/96
1996/97
1997/98
1998/99
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02
2002/03
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
Murder (rate)
Attempted murder (rate)
Aggrevated robbery (rate)
Firearm murder (rate)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
1994/95
1995/96
1996/97
1997/98
1998/99
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02
2002/03
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
Car hijacking (rate)

19
Source: (SAPS)
2.3.3. Common Assault and Assault GBH
SAPS figures for 2014/2015 indicate 183 381 reported cases of assault GBH (an increase of 0.11% since
2013/2014); and 162 573 reported cases of common assault (a decrease of 2.74% since 2013/2014)
[41]. Overall, reported rates of common assault and assault with intent to cause grievous bodily harm
(assault GBH) have decreased a great deal between 2003/2004 and 2014/2015, with a 40% decrease
in assault GBH and 51% decrease in common assault. However, these decreases could be indicative of
decreased reporting of assaults, rather than an actual decrease in incidents of assault [21]. For
instance, Statistics South Africa’s 2014/15 Victims of Crime Survey found that only 55.1% of assault
cases were reported to SAPS – highlighting the incredibly high rate of under-reporting of these
incidents of violent crime [17].
2.3.4. Sexual Violence
The Criminal Law (Sexual Offences Amendment Act) 32 of 2007 (SOA) expanded the definition of rape
from penile penetration of the vagina to include “all forms of sexual penetration without consent,
irrespective of gender’’. It also identified a number of new sexual offences. The national crime
statistics, however, do not clearly delineate between all 59 categories of sexual offences – offences
which are outlined by the SOA of 1957 and 2007 [98]. Consequently, it is unclear whether the sexual
offences data accurately reflects on all the sexual offences committed under these different categories
[98]. While the promulgation of the SOA has signified a positive step in addressing sexual violence in
the country, it has also posed a challenge when trying to compare SAPS statistics on sexual violence
since 2008 with that prior to the implementation of the Act [98], [99].
In South Africa certain forms of sexual violence fall under the SOA, while other types such as sexual
harassment in the workplace are governed by labour law and by the varying disciplinary codes of
different institutions and organizations [98]. There is a dearth of literature on sexual violence
occurring in workplaces and tertiary educational institutions. Further, owing to these establishments
not being required to share cases of sexual harassment with SAPS, there is a knowledge gap on the
prevalence of sexual offences in these settings. Consequently as not all forms of sexual violence in
South Africa are criminalised, the SAPS sexual offence data does not reflect all cases of reported sexual
violence [98].
SAPS figures for 2014/2015 indicate 58 390 reported sexual offence cases, a 2.19% decrease since the
2013/2014 reporting period [41]. However, there is a widely recognised degree of under-reporting of
sexual offences to the police – with police data indicating sexual offence rates far lower than that
indicated by population-based survey data [27], [100]. The 2014/15 Victims of Crime Survey indicated
that only 63% of sexual offences were reported to the police, suggesting that over a third of all sexual
offences go unreported [17]. Consequently, it is hard to determine whether the reported decreases
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
1994/95
1995/96
1996/97
1997/98
1998/99
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02
2002/03
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
Cash-in-transit robbery
Bank robberies

20
in annual sexual offences indicate a decrease in incidents or a decrease in reporting of incidents [21],
[98]. There is a consensus, however, that the levels of sexual violence in South Africa are worryingly
high [30], [98], [101]. Further, South African perpetrators are noted for the excessive levels of violence
often used during rape perpetration [102]. This has been likened to the nature of sexual violence used
in conflict [102].
3. DIFFERENT FORMS OF VIOLENT CRIME IN SOUTH AFRICA
Different forms of violent crime in South Africa which require special attention include: child
maltreatment and youth violence; violence against women; firearm violence; police violence; gang
violence; collective violence (vigilantism, xenophobic violence and protest violence); and transport
violence (taxi violence).
3.1. Child Maltreatment and Youth Violence
A significant proportion of the South African population are children (those below the age of 18 years)
[103]. Childhood experience of violence – through victimization and/ or observation is possibly the
greatest risk factor for violent crime in South Africa. The prevalence of violence against children (VAC)
in South Africa is worryingly high [7]. Different forms of VAC include: physical violence and child
homicide; corporal punishment; emotional abuse; sexual violence; neglect; bullying; IPV; and gang
violence. Gender, age and substance use are all risk factors for violence victimization and perpetration.
Certain children are also at increased risk for victimization as a result of their membership in a group,
which is particularly vulnerable in society. Community and societal-level factors which increase the
risk for VAC include: access to weapons and substances in the community; the presence of gangs;
poverty, inequality and unemployment; legislative and policy gaps pertaining to VAC; and poor law
enforcement.
3.1.1. Legislative Framework
South Africa has a fairly robust legal framework for upholding the rights of children and youth, and
addressing violence perpetrated by and against children. Key legislation includes: the Children’s Act
38 of 2005; the Social Assistance Act 13 of 2004; the Education Laws Amendment Act 31 of 2007;
Prevention of and Treatment for Substance Abuse Act 70 of 2008; the Liquor Act 59 of 2003; the SOA;
the Judicial Matters Second Amendment Act 43 of 2013; and the Domestic Violence Act 116 of 1998
(DVA). Unfortunately, however, there is often a significant disconnect between policy and practice
[104].
3.1.1.1. The Children’s Act
The Children’s Act provides a framework for identifying, referring and providing needed support, care
and rehabilitation for child victims of violence. It has a preventative focus, which aims at reducing the
likelihood of child abuse and neglect. The Act states that a Children’s Court can order a parent/
caregiver to engage in an early childhood development program/ parenting program (program
providing parent support and training parents to make use of non-violent discipline techniques);
and/or a child to engage in a rehabilitation program, when deemed necessary (to address (potential)
threats to the child’s safety)
3
. Two major gaps in this legislation are the prohibition of parents’ use of
corporal punishment and an absence of legislative mechanisms to fund prevention and intervention
services.
3.1.1.2. The Social Assistance Act
Children living in poor households are at increased risk of violence. The Social Assistance Act provides
for families who are economically disadvantaged to receive a child support grant (CSG) or a child
dependency grant (CDG) (in cases where the child has a disability). Although the money provided by
the CSGs and CDGs is minimal, these grants still better enable children to access food, education and
3
Section 46(1)(g) subsections (i), (ii), (iii), and section 46 (1)(h) sub-sections (iii), (vi) and (viii) of the Children’s Act.

21
health care [105]–[108]. However, owing to the size of these grants, it is unclear whether they are
effective in reducing the poverty related risk factors for VAC. Further, owing to a number of
implementation barriers, a large number of children (an estimated 2.35 million children) who are
eligible for social assistance are not in receipt of a grant [106], [109]. This is also an issue with CDGs
[110], [111].
3.1.1.3. The Education Laws Amendment Act
Violence in schools is often reflective of violence in the broader community [42]. The Education Laws
Amendment Act includes provisions to reduce the presence of illegal substances and dangerous
weapons in schools. A problematic aspect of this Act, however, is that it allows for school principals to
conduct body searches on students and require students to provide urine samples – when deemed
necessary
4
. Such actions, in the absence of social service personnel, could be traumatizing as well as
provide opportunities for principals to abuse students.
The Department of Basic Education (DBE) has established policies and strategies to address violence
and substance abuse in schools, including the National Strategy for the Prevention and Management
of Alcohol and Drug use amongst Learners in Schools and the National School Safety Framework.
Evidence regarding the efficacy of these policies and strategies is, however, questionable [42], [112],
[113].
3.1.1.4. The Sexual Offences Act
The SOA provides for an integrated victim-centred approach to the management of sexual offences.
Multi-sector involvement can enable the SOA and the National Policy Framework on the Management
of Sexual Offences to be implemented in a more effective way [114], [115]. The Act identifies various
services for victims of sexual offences, including post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP); counselling; and
mandatory HIV testing for offenders [116]–[118]. The Act also makes specific provision for individuals
with mental disabilities, owing to their particular vulnerability.
With regards to children, the SOA includes provisions, which place a reporting obligation on anyone
who is aware of a child being sexually abused. These reporting obligations, however, differ from those
outlined by the Children’s Act – this can complicate and confuse matters for those working in the
health, social service and criminal justice sector. Unfortunately, delays in implementing the National
Policy Framework on Sexual Offences (it was only adopted in 2013), have hampered the efficacy of
the SOA [115], [117].
3.1.1.5. The Domestic Violence Act
The DVA was promulgated in 1999. This legislation
5
aims to more effectively address the high rates of
DV in South Africa [119]. Under the DVA, victims of DV can apply for protection orders to prevent them
suffering further violence at the hands of their abuser/s [118], [119]. Violation of protection orders
should result in arrest of the perpetrator.
The DVA also provides for the referral of victims for medical care and counselling, and to shelters –
where needed. It does not, however, place an obligation on the Department of Social Development
(DSD) or the Department of Health (DOH) to fund and develop such services [118]. Consequently,
while the police are required to refer DV victims to relevant services, there are not always sufficient
services and shelters to refer victims to. With regards to children, the Minimum Standards on Shelters
for Abused Women does not identify the need of the children of victims of DV (who are often co-
4
Section 9 of the Education Laws Amendmen t Act.
5
Previous legislation addressing DV, namely the Prevention of Family Violence Act 133 of 1993, had numerous limitations
including its failure to address violence by cohabiting and same-sex partners.

22
victims) to access shelter. There is a need for the development of more shelters which can
accommodate DV victims and their children [120].
SAPS and the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development (DoJ&CD) have also not fulfilled
a number of their obligations with regard to the DVA. Policing issues include, the inability of many
police and police stations to properly record cases of DV; inadequate training of police with regards
to the DVA; and lack of accountability for police who do not adequately intervene in DV cases [118].
In terms of the DoJ&CD there have been some problems with respect to the issuing of protection
orders, with less than half of DV victims who apply for protection orders ever being granted them
[118]. Further issues include inadequate training of court officials concerning the DVA and secondary
victimization by court officials.
3.1.2. Violence in the Home
The structure of a child’s family has a significant impact on the likelihood that the child will suffer
physical abuse, neglect and verbal abuse [121]. It also increases the likelihood of the child growing up
to perpetrate violence. For instance, children who live with only one of their parents and children
living with neither parents (orphans and children living in child-headed households) are at greater risk
of experiencing violence than children who live in a home where both their biological parents are
present [121]. Children living with a single parent are at increased risk of sexual violence [122]. When
a step-parent is present in the home, children are at increased risk for physical and emotional abuse
[123] and sexual violence [124]. Having numerous caregivers also increases a child’s risk for emotional
and physical abuse [123]. In homes where a family member has a chronic illness, particularly if the
illness is HIV/AIDS, children are at increased risk for experiencing physical and emotional violence and
neglect [121], [123], [125]–[127]. Poverty, the mental health of caregivers and the manner in which
these households function, appears to influence the likelihood of whether or not a child living in such
a household, will experience abuse and neglect.
Discipline methods also increase or decrease the risk for abuse. Inconsistent discipline is associated
with emotional and physical abuse [123]. Children who experience harsh and inconsistent discipline
in the home are far more likely to become perpetrators of violence [128], [129], including perpetrators
of DV and IPV [130].
The manner in which the family operates and family members interact also has an impact. In homes
where there are high levels of familial conflict and violence, children are at greater risk for witnessing
violence, being abused and becoming perpetrators of abuse [123]. Children who witness IPV between
their parents are significantly more likely to experience physical and emotional violence [131]. Sexual
abuse also appears to be more prevalent among children who come from homes where exposure to
violence is relatively frequent [124]. Children growing up in homes where a family member is/ was
previously incarcerated are at high risk of violence victimisation at school. This is particularly the case
when the family member, who is/ has been incarcerated, is a parent (compared to when the family
member is a sibling) [42], [132]. Experiencing and witnessing violence increases the likelihood of a
child growing up to perpetrate violence, because through behavioural modelling children learn that
violence is a normal and acceptable way to deal with conflict [133].
Children are more likely to act violently if they have friends or peers who use drugs [18]. Further,
findings from South Africa indicate that if a child’s peers and/or family members abuse substances,
the child is at increased risk of experiencing physical violence [134], [135]. Substance abuse by a child’s
peers (such as marijuana and alcohol) and parents (alcohol and cigarettes) increase the likelihood of
the child using illegal substances – which in turn increases their risk for violence victimization and
perpetration [134]–[136].

23
3.1.3. Violence in Schools
A national study on school violence published by the Centre for Justice and Crime Prevention (CJCP)
in 2012, found that ‘’22.2% of high school learners…[had] been threatened with violence or had been
the victim of an assault, robbery and/or sexual assault at school in the past year [42, p. xi].’’
Violence in schools includes corporal punishment, bullying and sexual violence. It is illegal to use
corporal punishment in schools in South Africa. However, many schools still make use of it, with
evidence indicating that approximately 50% of school learners have experienced corporal punishment
at school [42], [132], [137], [138]. Corporal punishment is more common in primary schools than
secondary schools and more common in rural areas than urban areas [42].
While children of all ages are at risk of experiencing violence in schools, experience of violent crime is
highest in the 15-16 year age bracket [42]. Age is also reflected in violence in intimate relationships,
with IPV being higher among adolescents over 16 years [139], [140].
Factors associated with violence at school include access to weapons [141], [142]; and levels of
violence in the broader community [141], [143]. Many of the victims and perpetrators of violent crime
in South Africa are adolescents. The CJCP’s 2012 school violence study found that learners were
responsible for the majority of sexual assaults, threats and thefts experienced by other learners [42].
Furthermore, learners perpetrated 69.8% of assaults in schools. Having delinquent peers, such as
friends/ acquaintances who bring substances/weapons to school, is associated with violence
victimization.
One of the main forms of violence in schools is bullying. The CJCP’s study indicated that 13% of
secondary school learners have experienced bullying at school [42]. Children who have been bullied
are at greater risk of experiencing other forms of violence victimization [42]. A number of studies have
found an association between gender and bullying, with rates of bullying victimization and
perpetration generally being higher among males [137], [144], [145]. Age also appears to be
associated with bullying, with rates of bullying victimization and perpetration being higher among
Grade 8 learners than learners in older grades [144], [145]. Among Grade 11 learners in the rural
Eastern Cape 3.90% reported perpetrating bullying; 16.49% reported bullying victimisation; and 5.45%
reported both perpetrating and experiencing bullying [146]. Among Grade 8 learners in Cape Town,
Durban, Mankweng (in Limpopo Province) and Grade 9 learners in Port Elizabeth, rates of bullying
perpetration among boys ranged from 17.8% in Durban to 33.0% in Mankweng, while rates of bullying
victimization ranged from 24.3% in Port Elizabeth to 44.5% in Mankweng. Comparatively, among girls,
reported perpetration rates ranged from 10.7% in Port Elizabeth to 16.4% in Cape Town, while rates
of bullying victimization ranged from 18.8% in Port Elizabeth to 31.5% in Cape Town [144].
3.1.4. Violence against Vulnerable Groups of Children
Three groups of children who have been identified as particularly vulnerable to violence are children
with disabilities, children living on the streets and orphans and children living in child-headed
households. There is a need for research, particularly nationally representative research, on the nature
and extent of victimization among vulnerable groups of children in South Africa.
3.1.4.1. Children with Disabilities
International evidence has identified children with disabilities to be at increased vulnerability to abuse
[147]. The lack of population-based representative literature on children with disabilities in South
Africa, as well as the lack of consistency in definitions and measures for disability makes it difficult to:
(a) determine the number of children with disabilities in the country (however, estimates suggests
approximate 1 million children with disabilities); and (b) the prevalence, extent and nature of the
violence they face [148], [149]. One study has provided us with a broad understanding of this issue,

24
however, as it is not a nationally representative study its findings cannot be generalizable [150].
Despite this limitation, findings from this study have identified certain helpful insights regarding the
nature of violence against children with different types of disabilities.
Children with physical and intellectual disabilities are at greater risk of sexual violence than non-
disabled children and there appears to be a higher prevalence of neglect amongst children with
learning disabilities than those without. Among children with multiple disabilities, there is a higher
prevalence of sexual violence but not neglect. Gender also influences the nature of the victimization,
with girls at greater risk for sexual violence [150].
As with international findings, it appears that children with disabilities are at greater risk of
experiencing sexual violence and neglect, but not at greater risk of physical violence – as compared
with non-disabled children [150]. As with risk for violence in general in South Africa, socio-economic
status may influence the risk for victimization [150].
3.1.4.2. Children Living on the Streets
The literature regarding violence against street children in South Africa is limited. The existing
evidence on this issue is based on small studies conducted in Cape Town, Durban and Johannesburg
[151], [152]. Research on the factors which contribute to children ending up on the streets is quite
out-dated, with much of it being written before 2000 [153], [154].
Not only are street children particularly vulnerable to violence, but abuse (particularly physical
violence and witnessing or experiencing DV) is a common reason given for why children leave their
homes for the streets [151]–[153]. Experience of violence (being bullied and victimised by other
homeless shelter residents) is also a common reason given for why many of these children
subsequently leave homeless shelters. Orphans are at increased risk of becoming street children [151],
[152], and boys are more likely to end up on the streets as compared to girls [151], [154].
On the streets, children are at risk of being abused by security guards and policeman. Girls also
experience violence by other boys on the streets. In one study with street children, 67.3% of
participants reported experiencing violence while on the streets – primarily assaults and stabbings
[152]. Street children also appear to be at significantly greater risk for experiencing bullying than non-
street children [143]. There is a need for nationally representative research to be conducted to assess
the nature and extent of violence faced by children on the streets compared to non-street children,
as well as a more comprehensive investigation into the risks factors for children becoming street
children.
3.1.4.3. Orphans and Child-Headed Households
Owing to the high rates of male homicide as well as the HIV/AIDS pandemic, there are a large number
of children growing up as orphans and/or in child-headed households in South Africa [155], [156].
Orphans and children living in child-headed households are more likely to be living in poverty and they
are at increased vulnerability to neglect and abuse owing to lack of/ limited adult supervision and lack
of protection [126]. Being cared for by non-parent caregivers increases a child’s risk for abuse, which
is possibly associated with the extra stress placed on the non-parent caregiver [121].
3.2. Violence against Women
South Africa has one of the highest rates of VAW in the world [48], [157]. In 2009, the country’s IPV
rate was six times that of the global average [7]. Further, in a cross-sectional study conducted with
men in three districts in the Eastern Cape and KwaZulu Natal, 25% of men admitted to having
perpetrated rape [48]. The high rates of VAW are not only reflective of the overall high rates of

25
violence in the society, but they highlight the gendered nature of violent crime in South Africa [7],
[39], [157], [158].
The existing data on national prevalence rates for different forms of VAW is largely based on SAPS
national crime statistics. Though the national crime statistics indicate high levels of violent crime
against women, they do not reflect the true extent of the problem, with national victim of crime
surveys indicating a much higher prevalence of victimization than that indicated by SAPS [159]. There
is significant under-reporting of IPV (physical, sexual, emotional and economic abuse) and non-IP
sexual violence. This under-reporting is owing to, among other factors, lack of trust in the police and
judiciary.
The rights of women to equality, dignity and fundamental human rights are enshrined within the South
African Constitution. Further, since the end of apartheid, the government has introduced numerous
laws aimed at addressing the high rates of VAW in the country. These laws include the SOA and the
DVA [39], [158]. While these laws indicate a positive step towards addressing and combatting the high
rates of violence against women and girls, the state has not effectively ensured their full
implementation. Consequently, there is a significant disconnect between the constitutional rights of
every woman to ‘’freedom and security of the person
6
’’ and ‘’equal protection and benefit of the law
7
’’
and their freedom from violence in reality [39], [158]. General Recommendation 19(1) of the
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) describes GBV
as ‘’a form of discrimination that seriously inhibits women's ability to enjoy rights and freedoms on a
basis of equality with men’’.
As with other forms of violent crime, the factors associated with VAW in South Africa are multiple and
interconnected. Factors at the individual, relationship, community and societal level, interact to
increase or decrease the likelihood of a woman falling victim to violent crime.
3.2.1. Individual Level Risk Factors
At the individual level, risk factors for a woman’s violent victimization include: substance use (this
particularly increases the risk for IPV) [26], [160], [161]; previous victimization (childhood sexual
assault, previous rape, physical beatings, observing maternal IPV victimization) [27], [54]; age (for non-
IP rape) [27], [53]; and low-levels of education (for IPV) [35], [37], [161], [162]. Unemployment and
low socio-economic status are generally associated with an increased risk for IPV [35], [162]. In poorer
households, conflict over limited resources can increase the risk for IPV [148]. Poverty and low levels
of education can also increase a woman’s risk for IPV through increasing the likelihood that she will
engage in transactional sex (having sex in exchange for resources). Transactional sex is associated with
increased risk for IPV victimization [161], [163].
Men are the primary perpetrators of VAW. Risk factors for male perpetration of VAW include:
witnessing DV or experiencing violence as a child [25]–[27], [48], [55], [56], [130]; alcohol abuse (IPV
and non-IP sexual violence) [24]–[26], [49], [56], [64]; drug abuse (particularly physical IPV and non-IP
rape) [24]–[26], [34], [47], [49], [56]; age (sexual IPV and non-IP rape perpetration) [24], [27], [47]–
[52], [56]; poverty [35]; being unemployed (IPV and femicide) [37], [38]; and having a lower level of
education [34], [35].
Findings regarding the association between lower levels of education, unemployment, low income
and non-IP rape perpetration were mixed. There is evidence to suggest that rather than the poorest
men and/ or the least educated men in communities being more likely to perpetrate non-IP rape, men
who are relatively advantaged in their communities (more educated, higher maternal education, have
6
Chapter 2, s 12(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996.
7
Section 9(1) of the Constitution.

26
ever been employed) are more likely to perpetrate non-IP rape [48], [49], [56]. However, men who
perpetrate non-IP rape are also more likely to have suffered food insecurity [48]. These findings
suggests that men living in a context of economic deprivation, yet who are less poor and better
educated, are more likely to perpetrate non-IP rape than the most disadvantaged men in their
communities. It appears that a sense of entitlement and power plays a role in the perpetration of non-
IP rape in South Africa [56].
Other perpetrator characteristics include personal views which normalize and accept gender
inequitable norms and GBV – such as condoning the hitting of a woman and holding to traditional
notions of gender roles [24]–[26]. Poor mental health/ psychological state is also associated with VAW
perpetration [24], [50], [59]. Depressive symptoms, personality disorder traits (such as anti-social
personality traits and narcissistic traits e.g. lack of empathy, blame externalization and ‘’Machiavellian
Egocentricity’’), and a negative perception of one’s life circumstances in comparison with others) are
associated with perpetration of VAW [24], [50], [59]. Lack of empathy, in particular, is associated with
rape perpetration [24].
Men who engage in/ have a history of engaging in violent crime including: being a gang member;
perpetrating robbery/ theft; illegally owning guns; possession of weapons (other than guns); having
been arrested; having been imprisoned; having raped a man; and/ or bullying others when at school,
are significantly more likely to perpetrate sexual violence [48]. Perpetration of physical and sexual IPV
is also strongly correlated with engagement in violence outside the home – in the community and the
workplace [25], [26]. These findings highlight how VAW perpetration is often reflective of a violent
pattern of behaviour, with men who perpetrate VAW being more likely to perpetrate other forms of
violent behaviour and in a variety of contexts.
3.2.2. Relationship Level Risk Factors
IPV is much more likely to occur in relationships where the male partner holds to patriarchal notions
of male dominance and control. Men who display dominant and controlling behaviour in relationships,
often have a perception of ‘’ownership’’ of their partner [55], [59], [164], [165]. When relationships
do not reflect gender equitable norms and when there is a power imbalance in the relationship,
women are at greater risk for IPV. Further, when controlling and dominant men perceive that their
control and power in the relationship is under threat – they are more likely to resort to violence in an
attempt to restore their control.
There are conflicting findings as to the association between economic dependence and risk for
violence victimization among women. Some studies indicate that economic dependency makes
women more vulnerable to victimization through decreasing their negotiating power in a relationship
and restricting their options of leaving the relationship if it turns violent [162], [166]. Conversely, other
studies have found that economic independence can increase a woman’s risk for intimate partner (IP)
victimization (through ‘threatening’ the male partner’s control and power in the relationship) [72],
[167]. Generally, however, economic dependence appears to be a greater risk factor for IPV
victimization than economic independence.
Sexual risk-taking behaviour increases the risk for VAW – both perpetration and victimization. Having
multiple sexual partners, engaging in transactional sex, having sex with a sex worker, having
concurrent sexual partners, and inconsistent condom use/ or unprotected sex are associated with
male perpetration of IPV and non-IP rape [27], [54], [56], [162], [168]–[170]. Similarly, female sexual
risk-taking behaviour, such as having had multiple sexual partners (>5); having casual sexual partners;
and engaging in transactional sex are all associated with increased risk for victimization [160], [161].

27
There is a higher risk for IPV in relationships characterised by high levels of conflict, such as conflict
over alcohol use, sex, and perceived infidelity [25], [26], [37], [165]. Poor communication in primary
intimate relationships is also a risk factor for both IPV and non-IP rape [37], [56]. Men with poorer
communication skills may use rape as a means to communicate power. Poorer communication skills
among rapists could also indicate that men who rape are less interested in emotional intimacy in
relationships.
3.2.3. Community and Societal Level Risk Factors
As with other forms of violence, communities where alcohol, drugs and firearms are easily available
provide an enabling context for VAW perpetration. Further, VAW flourishes in communities where the
perpetration of VAW is normalized and accepted and where DV is seen as a private matter [7], [148],
[165], [171].
Pervasive social and cultural attitudes and values in South Africa - such as patriarchy, male sexual
entitlement and the normalization and acceptance of violent expressions of masculinities - tolerate
and excuse male perpetration of VAW [25], [53], [164]. This includes the notion that a man is entitled
to ‘punish’ his female partner (such as hitting or physically beating her) for perceived transgressions
[14]. The male sexual drive discourse – the notion that men are driven by an uncontrollable sexual
urge – contributes to victim-blaming and the normalizing and excusing of male perpetration of sexual
violence [23], [25], [53], [172]–[175]. These deeply entrenched gender-inequitable norms have
created an environment conducive to high rates of gendered violence [25], [160], [165].
3.3. Firearm Crime and Violence
3.3.1. Firearm Murder/Homicide
Between 1994 and 1998 South Africa’s firearm homicide rate remained relatively constant, averaging
close to 28 per 100,000 people, with the proportion of homicides involving firearms increasing from
41.5% to 49.4% [176]. In 1998, firearms were reportedly used in 49% of all murders and in 75% of all
attempted murders. Close to half of all firearm homicides in 1998 took place in two provinces, namely
KwaZulu-Natal and Gauteng [90]. Critically, firearm homicide is not evenly distributed throughout
South Africa, but is rather concentrated in certain under-resourced urban areas.
From 1998 South Africa’s firearm homicide rate steadily declined to 17 per 100,000 in 2007 (a 40%
reduction), with the total number of firearm homicides in South Africa shrinking from 12,413 to 8,319
over the same period (a 33% reduction) [176]. Official disaggregated SAPS data on the rate of firearm
homicide or murder for the period from 2008 has unfortunately not been made publicly available. A
study of 2009 mortuary data nonetheless indicated that there continued to be noticeable variations
in firearm homicides across provinces, with such homicides continuing to be considerably more
pronounced in KwaZulu-Natal (42.3%), Gauteng (39.7%), Mpumalanga (33.2%) and the Western Cape
(21.8%) compared to the other provinces [73].
Based on SAPS data, it appears that between 1999/2000 and 2013/2014 there were a total of 86,442
murders with a firearm [91]. Combining this data with that of the disaggregated murder data
published by the National Crime Prevention Centre for the period 1994 to 1998 (which reported
57,106 firearm-related murders) [90], results in a total number of 143,548 people who were murdered
with a firearm between 1 January 1994 and 31 March 2014. This is equivalent to 35% of all murders
for that period.
Mortuary data from four major cities in South Africa (Cape Town, Durban, Johannesburg and Pretoria)
also indicated significant reductions in firearm homicides from the early 2000s. That is, from the late

28
1990s to the mid-2000s, firearms were the leading cause of all non-natural deaths
8
in South Africa. A
1999 study by the National Injury Mortality Surveillance System (NIMSS) of the Medical Research
Council (MRC) and the University of South Africa (UNISA) found that overall, firearms accounted for
26.3% of non-natural deaths in Cape Town, Durban, Johannesburg and Pretoria. Sharp force injuries
(15.7% of total non-natural deaths), motor vehicle accidents (pedestrians) (10.5% of the total non-
natural deaths) and blunt force (5.8% of the total non-natural deaths) were the three other major
means of non-natural death [177].
By 2008 sharp force injuries had become the leading cause of non-natural death (and therefore
homicide too) in South Africa (13.6% of total non-natural deaths) followed by firearms (10.8% of total
non-natural deaths). Blunt force injuries accounted for 6.9% of such deaths. Johannesburg, Durban
and Cape Town experienced the most noticeable reductions in firearm homicides, with such
reductions evident for all age groups [12]. This trend was maintained in 2009, with sharp force injuries
(41.8% of all homicides) continuing to be the leading cause of homicide
9
followed by firearms (29% of
all homicides)[73]. Further to this, a more recent study on adolescent homicide in Johannesburg
revealed that the homicide rate for adolescents (15-19 year olds) dropped from 18.2 (per 100,000) in
2001 to 4.8 (per 100,000) in 2009, with the average firearm homicide rate for that period being 11.96
[85], [86]. In addition, the findings from the second National Female Homicide Study show a decrease
in the overall number of femicides, and a significant decrease in IP and non-IP femicides due to firearm
injuries from 1999 to 2009 [178].
3.3.2. Firearms and Non-Fatal Violence against Women and Children
Firearms have featured prominently in DV, IP and non-IP violence, and rape in South Africa with female
victims either being threatened with a firearm by a male perpetrator, or sustaining firearm injuries as
a result of a male perpetrator discharging a firearm [179], [180]. The data on firearm violence against
women in South Africa is limited given exceedingly low reporting rates [7]. For instance, SAPS has
reported that firearms were used in: 23,872 cases of DV; 7,985 rapes; and 323 sexual assaults for the
period 1999/2000 to 2013/2014 [91].
There are nonetheless some insightful studies on the link between firearms and non-fatal violence
against women. A two province study (Eastern Cape and KwaZulu-Natal) on rape indicated that men
who had raped were likely to have had access to a firearm, particularly an illegal firearm [48].
Involvement in gangs, which is often associated with easy access to illegal firearms, has also been
identified as a key risk factor for rape perpetration [25]. The 2011 Victims of Crime Survey reported
that firearms were highly likely to have been used in close to a quarter of all sexual assaults [181].
Data on non-fatal firearm violence perpetrated against children is largely absent in South Africa.
Studies on child maltreatment have suggested that firearm availability in the home and
neighbourhoods is a risk factor for child maltreatment [42], [182]. One of the only studies explicitly on
children and non-fatal firearm injuries focused on patient data from Red Cross War Memorial
Children’s Hospital in Cape Town for the period 1991 to 2010. This study indicated that the total
number of firearm injuries on average increased significantly between 1994 and 2000, and then on
average noticeably declined between 2000 and 2010. Throughout this entire period children mostly
sustained firearm injuries due to being caught in the crossfire or due to accidental shootings [183].
3.3.3. Illegal/Unlawful Possession of Firearms and Ammunition
8
This includes homicides, suicides, accidents and undetermined causes of death.
9
Homicides accounted for 36.2% of all non-natural deaths in 2009 according to mortuary data.

29
The charge of illegal or unlawful
10
possession of firearms and ammunition (IPFA) entails the possession
of firearms and ammunition for which one does not have an official license issued by SAPS. The
reporting thereof is specifically categorised by SAPS as a crime that is “detected as a result of police
action”. Hence, it is a relatively robust data category, as it does not rely on the reporting challenges of
many other violent crime categories, such as assault, robbery and sexual violence. Hence, significant
increases in the IPFA rate of illegal possession of arms and ammunition are typically a strong indication
of intentional, coordinated and large-scale police firearm control actions. Very little consideration is
typically given to this category of reported crime, and previously IPFA has not been analysed in relation
to murder rates in the South African context.
In South Africa, as indicated in the chart below, there was a 25% increase in the rate (per 100,000) of
the IPFA between 1994/1995 and 1999/2000, from 28.5 to 35.7 respectively. The rate subsequently
remained relatively constant until 2004/2005 when there was a further increase of the rate to 36.3.
Thereafter the rate declined by 21% over the following two years and remained relatively stable for
the next nine years at an average rate of 28.9.
As revealed in the chart below, the trends in the IPFA rate appear to be closely correlated to the
murder rate, particularly the firearm murder rate (based on limited data). That is, sustained increases
in the rate of IPFA correspond with marked declines in the murder rate. In addition, where the IPFA
rate plateaus or declines there is a corresponding slowdown and thereafter an increase in the
homicide rate. This dynamic trend should not be unexpected, as unlicensed or unlawful firearms have
typically been used commit most firearm homicides in post-apartheid South Africa.
Chart 4: National homicide rate and illegal possession of firearm and ammunition rate, 1994/1995 - 2013/2014
11
Source: (SAPS annual reports)
3.3.4. Link between Firearms Control and Firearm Violence
Only a handful of studies have sought to determine the causes of the reduction in firearm homicide
rate in South Africa. All of these studies concluded that such a decrease was primarily attributable to
the introduction of more rigorous firearms controls that were ushered in with the Firearms Control
Act (FCA) [178], [184]. Similarly, the only study on firearm injuries in South Africa, which had an
exclusive focus on children, stated that a reduction in the admission of gunshot victims to Red Cross
Children’s Hospital in Cape Town between 2001 and 2010 was directly the result of the FCA [183].
10
The term “illegal” was replaced by the term “unlawful” in the 2012/13 SAPS annual report crime statistics table for the
first time in order to bring reporting in line with the FCA. A person would be guilty of this offence if they are “unlawfully in
possession of” firearms and ammunition, and are “not the holder of a licence, permit or authorisation to possess” firearms
and ammunition.
11
SAPS did not release crime rate data for 2014/15.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
1994/95
1995/96
1996/97
1997/98
1998/99
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02
2002/03
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
Murder (rate)
Firearm murder (rate)
Illegal possessi on of firearms &
ammo (rate)

30
At first glance this common explanation across studies appears to be plausible given the underlying
logic of the FCA. That is, this Act has chiefly sought to: use more rigorous firearm licensing procedures
to restrict individual access to firearms as a means to lower the risk of firearm injuries and deaths; and
the approximate parallels between the initial point at which the firearm homicide rate began to
decline and the emergence of the FCA. However, there are two fundamental problems with this
reasoning.
Firstly, despite the text of the FCA having been approved by Parliament in 2000, this Act only entered
into South African law in late-2004 after the promulgation of the regulations for this Act, which by
then was well into the firearm homicide downturn. Secondly, most of these studies provide no
detailed analysis of how the wide variety of FCA-related controls was implemented and their specific
relationship to the reduction in firearm homicide. This is a key shortcoming given the South African
government’s generally less than mediocre track record in implementing the array of other legislation
that has violence prevention aspirations [7], [37].
3.4. Police Violence
3.4.1. Deaths as a Result of Police Shootings
The use of lethal force by police, particularly firearm violence, is common in societies where there are
high levels of violence combined with large numbers of armed police personnel [185]–[187]. This is
the case in South Africa, where fatal shootings by SAPS officials have principally occurred during
attempts to apprehend and/or detain suspects, as well as due to negligence or whilst off-duty. The
chart below indicates that deaths due to police shootings declined between 1998/99 and 2002/03 by
42%, but increased dramatically by 88% between 2005/06 and 2008/09 and then declined by 44%
over the next five years.
Chart 5: Firearm deaths due to SAPS action: 1997/1998 – 2013/2014
Source: (Bruce, 2005) [188] (Bruce, 2010a)[189] (Independent Police Investigative Directive)
Note: No data was provided by the ICD on firearm deaths due to SAPS action in 2010/11.
A comprehensive, nationally-based study of 2009 mortuary data estimated that there had been 5,513
firearm homicides in South Africa [73]. Hence, SAPS members were responsible for firearm deaths
that were equivalent to between 8% and 9% of all recorded firearm homicides during 2009.
3.4.2. Police Homicides
Between 1994 and 1998, 82.3% of all SAPS homicides were a consequence of gun shots [190].
Following the end of much of the political violence during the mid- to late-1990s the level of police
homicides declined considerably from 263 in 1994 to 77 in 2013, more than a 300% decrease over
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
1997/98
1998/99
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02
2002/03
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
Firearm deaths due to SAP S action

31
that period of 20 years. Nonetheless, the murder of police personnel has remained an area of grave
concern to both the police and its political leadership.
For example, in June 2013, in a speech at the funeral of a senior police official, the Minister of Police
at the time, Nathi Mthethwa eulogised that the SAPS “are in the midst of a war; a war that has been
declared by heartless criminals on our men and women in blue…[and that] we shall ensure that those
who kill police officers pay the price accordingly” [191], [192].
Chart 6: Murder of SAPS personnel 1994/95-2014/15
Source: (SAPS)
3.5. Gang Violence
Some groups involved in violent criminal activities have a flexible structure and come together for
short periods to perpetrate criminal acts (e.g. hijackers), while others are highly formalized and
structured criminal organizations - such as many of the Coloured gangs on the ‘Cape Flats’, in the
Western Cape [3]. Determining whether a group involved in violent criminal activity is a gang or is
participating in organized crime, depends on how such entities and such crime is defined [3].
According to Article (1) (iv) of the Prevention of Organised Crime Act 121 of 1998, a criminal gang is
defined as:
‘’…any formal or informal ongoing organisation, association or group of three or more
persons, which has as one of its activities the commission of one or more criminal offences,
which has an identifiable name or identifying sign or symbol and whose members individually
or collectively engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity.’’
The majority of the existing research on gang violence in South Africa is focused on Coloured gangs in
the Western Cape, with a lack of research on tsotsi gangs in Black townships and gangs operating in
other provinces [193]. Of the limited existing research conducted on Black township gangs, the
majority was published before 2000, which consequently limits its relevance and applicability [194],
[195]. The following sections will discuss gang violence on the ‘Cape Flats’ and youth involvement in
gangs.
3.5.1. Gang Violence on the ‘Cape Flats’
The forced removals which occurred under apartheid contributed to the development of street gangs
on the impoverished and infrastructurally marginalised ‘Cape Flats’, where many Coloured people
were relocated [196]. The growth of organized criminal networks post-apartheid, has been argued to
have contributed to a number of these Coloured street gangs changing to form ‘’highly organized
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
1994/95
1995/96
1996/97
1997/98
1998/99
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02
2002/03
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
Police murders (firearm)

32
criminal networks’’ [3, p. 147], [196]. A 2006 estimate, placed the number of gangs on the ‘Cape Flats’
at around 130 [3], [196, p. 38]. Some of the larger, more powerful, established gangs include the
Americans, Hard Livings, Mongrels, Sexy Boys, Fancy Boys, Dixie Boys and the Junior Mafia [3], [196].
Three areas on the ‘Cape Flats’ where there have been particularly prolonged and high rates of gang
violence are: Nyanga, Manenberg and Hanover Park [197]. Since their inception, the gangs on the
‘Cape Flats’ have been involved in violent crime. From 2010, however, there has been an ongoing war
between some of the main gangs namely, the Hard Livings and the Americans [197]. Kinnes (2014)
reflects: ‘’[t]he fighting took the form of drive-by shootings, gang members shooting at each other in
full daylight and attacks on people in their homes [197, p. 14].’’
Gang violence may be triggered by external factors which threaten power dynamics between gangs
[3]. For instance the assassination by People against Gangsterism and Drugs (PAGAD) related groups
of a number of gang leaders during the 1990s resulted in an increase in “intra-gang and inter-gang
conflict’’[3, p. 150]. Inter-gang conflict, over issues such as territory and criminal markets, not only
poses a risk to rival gang members but also to the community at large [183]. Gang violence can be
consequent of: intentional criminal acts – such as robbery and rape; gang initiation practices; and
repercussions for trying to exit a gang. In addition, gang violence may be perpetrated against non-
gang members who have witnessed gang members perpetrating a violent act, and thus pose a possible
‘liability’; and perpetrated by gang leaders as a means ‘’of instilling in gang members the type of
respect tinged with fear that is functional for gang leadership [3, pp. 150–151].’’ Further, despite
internal gang structures and rules, a significant proportion of gang violence is intra-gang violence, as
a result of rivalry and tension between members [3].
3.5.2. Youth Involvement in Gangs
Children may be affected by gangs as victims or perpetrators, or both [183], [198]. Children who are
addicted to substances, have dropped out of school and have peers and/or family members who are
involved in gangs, are much more likely to become involved in gangs. Children coming from disruptive
homes, such as children from divorced families or homes where there are high levels of conflict and
DV, may join gangs in search of identity and belonging and to gain access to drugs [79]. They are also
more likely to join gangs if they live in communities where there are high levels of violence and
poverty, and where drug abuse is rife. Inadequate policing and lack of opportunities/ minimal
resources for engagement in leisure activities, also increases the likelihood of youth joining gangs
[148].
The extent of child involvement in gangs in South Africa is unclear because gang membership is fluid
and generally not recorded [199]. Existing prevalence data, which is primarily based on youth surveys,
suggests that approximately 19.4% of learners have ever been involved in a gang [140]. KwaZulu-Natal
has the highest prevalence of school members in gangs and the Western Cape has the lowest
prevalence rate [140].
The majority of children and youth involved in gangs in South Africa are males, males are also
significantly more likely to have been solicited/ pressured into joining a gang [140]. Further, children
in younger grades (Grade 8, 22.4%) are more likely to be involved in gangs than children in older grades
(Grade 11, 16.5%) – this suggests a correlation between age and engagement in gangs.
3.6. Collective Violence
3.6.1. Vigilante Violence
There is a lack of data on the prevalence and frequency of acts of vigilante violence in South Africa,
owing to among other factors difficulty in determining when a crime was as a result of vigilante

33
violence versus other forms of criminal violence [14]. An unpublished SAPS report listed 78 cases of
vigilante violence (ending in homicide), from April to June 2012 in Khayelitsha [200]. While this is
unrepresentative, it highlights the extent to which vigilante violence occurs in some communities
within South Africa.
Vigilante violence or ‘mob justice’ as a type of ‘’informal community policing’’ has been a growing
phenomenon in South Africa, since the late 1980s [14, p. 53], [201]. Incidents of vigilante violence
most commonly occur in poorer communities, such as informal settlements, where there are high
rates of crime, and a real/ and or perceived under-responsiveness to this crime by law enforcement
[14], [201]. Perpetrators of vigilante violence often receive community support, as they are seen as
protectors and upholders of justice in the community, where the criminal justice services of the state
are perceived to be weak. Forms of vigilante violence include ‘necklacing’, stoning to death, beating,
flogging with a sjambok, and demolishing of the accused’s home [14], [200], [201].
Martin (2010) refers to vigilante violence as a ‘’patriarchal mode of social control’’ which renders
women, young people, those living in poverty and socially marginalized individuals (e.g. non-
nationals), particularly vulnerable [14, p. 53]. Vigilante actions do not necessarily reflect the values
and the will of the whole community, but rather they generally reflect the values and desires of those
(generally men) who are most powerful and vocal in the community. Hereby, they sustain patriarchal
systems of control and governance [14], [201].
Vigilante violence is problematic for a number of reasons. Firstly, acts of vigilante violence are in
violation of human rights and the post-apartheid state’s commitment to non-violence [14], [15], [201].
Secondly, acts of vigilante violence are extra judicial, and therefore illegal [201]. Through use of extra
judicial means, perpetrators of vigilante violence criminalize themselves [14]. Vigilante acts are not in
line with due process (i.e. victims of vigilante violence do not undergo impartial investigation to
determine whether there is sufficient evidence to implicate them for the crime/s they are accused of.
Further, that which is determined a crime, varies between different communities and is not necessarily
defined as a crime under South African penal law; but rather is identified by the powerful in the
community as something which violates the community’s moral code [14], [201]. Thirdly, vigilante
violence reinforces the widely held misconception that violence is the way to resolve conflict and
meter out justice in South Africa. Through their actions, vigilante mobs expose other community
members to violence – not only is this traumatising, but it serves to normalise the use of violence and
is a risk factor for further community violence.
3.6.2. Xenophobic Violence
‘’Xenophobic violence is a form of hate crime. A criminal act motivated by negative attitudes
or resentment towards the target group…when collective violence is specifically targeted at
members of a certain group because of their national origin or because they are perceived as
outsiders, not to belong; and when perpetrators make it clear their intention is to drive that
group out their community or country; there is no doubt that violence is xenophobic. [202, p.
2].’’
Literature concerning the violence faced by non-nationals in South Africa is limited, with studies which
have been conducted often being small scale and thus not nationally representative [203].
Furthermore, those that are not South African citizens are often fearful of reporting cases of
victimization to the police, this is particularly the case when they are undocumented migrants [14].
Consequently, it is difficult to determine the extent and frequency of xenophobic violence in the
country. However, possibly the most accurate estimation is that there are around three serious cases
of xenophobic violence per week – these are generally homicides [203].

34
The violence that non-nationals face in South Africa is three-fold; first, they experience violence from
other non-nationals; secondly, they are exposed to generalised violence and thirdly, they are often
victims of xenophobic violence [204], [205]. This xenophobic violence is partly rooted in mistrust,
competition for scarce resources and pressure on social services [204]–[206]. In a context of high
poverty and competition for scarce resources, there is a perception among many South Africans that
non-nationals are ‘stealing’ their jobs and placing an extra burden on already strained social services
[207]–[209]. Consequently, non-nationals are most at risk of xenophobic violence in poorer, socio-
economically disadvantaged communities [202]. Non-nationals are also frequently blamed for crime
[203], [210], [211], despite the reality that South Africans perpetrate the majority of violent crime in
the country [3], [9].
Cases of xenophobic violence in South Africa, have been reported since the early 1990s [202], [212].
However, in May 2008 there was an ‘’eruption’’ of xenophobic violence across the country; this was
the first time that the country had seen such widespread and severe xenophobic violence [212]. As a
result of these xenophobic attacks: approximately 60 people died, many were injured and/ or had
their possessions stolen, shops were looted and around 100 000 people were displaced [202], [207],
[210], [213]. Sporadic outbreaks of xenophobic violence have occurred since 2008, including
widespread attacks in the informal settlement of Diepsloot in 2012 [207], [210]; and most recently, in
2015, the attacks in KwaZulu Natal, as well as Johannesburg, Grahamstown [214]–[217], and
Lebowakgomo [218]. The excessive use of and the degree of violence used during xenophobic attacks
in South Africa, is particularly disturbing [209], [219].
The South African government has struggled to effectually respond to xenophobic violence. This,
combined with certain anti-foreigner political rhetoric by prominent persons arguably contributes to
and fuels hatred towards non-nationals and justifies violence towards them [14], [203], [217], [220].
This includes the blaming of non-nationals for crime and pressure on social services [14], [203], [217],
[220], [221]. An example of this is comments made by Zulu King Goodwill Zwelithini in 2015, where he
referred to non-nationals as ‘flees and lice’, these comments were followed by a wave of xenophobic
attacks in KwaZulu-Natal and parts of Gauteng [217].
Refugees and foreigners also face xenophobia at the hands of government departments, including the
police [14], [202], [213]. Xenophobic treatment by the police includes, targeted harassment, arbitrary
detention and under-responsiveness to outbursts of xenophobic violence [14], [202], [213]. The most
recent example of this is the lack of police response to the xenophobic attacks in October 2015 in
Grahamstown [202], [214]. During these attacks, police stood by while non-nationals, were attacked
and their shops looted [214].
3.6.3. Protest Violence
‘’ [T]he very nature of the apartheid regime and its symbols encouraged the view among anti-
apartheid struggle heroes of violence as a justifiable tool against an unjust regime. However, in
the post-apartheid period, violent protests and strikes on various levels of South African society
continue [31, p. 49].’’
Many South Africans are becoming increasingly frustrated with the state and other institutions which
they feel are not adequately and timeously addressing the country’s high levels of inequality and
poverty; this frustration is reflected in the increasing number of strikes and protests being witnessed
across the country [8], [11], [31], [213]. Many are exercising their legitimate right to protest and
engage in strike action, as a means of mobilizing change and pressurising the government into

35
delivering needed services [221]. Since 2009
12
there has been a significant increase in the number of
protests across the country, and in the number of protests which have been violent in nature [11],
[213].
In 2015, a wave of university student protests broke out across the country, with many students
demanding a decrease in fees and an end to the financial exclusion of many South Africans from
universities. While many students refrained from violence, a number of students resorted to
intimidation, destruction of property, assault and other forms of violence. The protests eventually
resulted in a freezing of fee increases for 2016, at tertiary institutions across the country. Despite this
achievement, however, violent student protests have continued in 2016. Many of these students who
resort to violence, see themselves as part of a new economic liberation movement, justifying all means
of violence to address what they perceive as institutionalized structural violence against people of
Colour.
Protest violence is not a new phenomenon in South Africa; it is historically embedded in the resistance
movements formed during apartheid, where violence was seen as a legitimate way of responding to
state sponsored oppression, discrimination and violence [8], [31]. During apartheid violent protests
were seen as a justifiable means of challenging an oppressive regime who was actively resistant to
change [31], [213]. The use of violence during protests, however, has continued despite the end of
apartheid [8], [31], [213]. This notion of the acceptability of the use of violence to voice complaints
and bring about change continues to be accepted and normalized by many today [11], [31], [213].
Petrus and Isaacs-Martins (2011) state:
‘’…[T]he use of violence, the destruction of property and the burning of tyres and blockading roads
were very much a part of protest activities during the apartheid period, yet we still witness such
activities during modern day strikes and protests in contemporary South Africa. The same values
that were used to justify this behaviour in the past, namely those of the 'heroes' of 'the struggle',
have been learnt by the new heroes of the post-apartheid struggle [31, p. 52].’’
Throughout South Africa recent protests have seen the convergence of individuals with strong pro-
violence masculinities into goal-oriented groups that have embraced a type of ‘protest masculinity’.
This variety of masculinity, as suggested by scholars of gender relations, entails aggressive and
destructive challenges to ‘hegemonic’ masculinity, and is characterised by a type of narcissism that
emerges from a sense of powerlessness and insecurity. It has characteristically been observed among
poor, working class men who have displayed hyper-macho behaviour due to their lowly
socioeconomic status in society [261], [262].
Recent protest events at universities have shown us that this combined antipathy towards the status
quo has been converted into physical violence in circumstances when tightknit groups of those more
prone to violence dictate the direction of the protest without there being any significant moderating
factors in place. Furthermore, violence is almost inevitable when groups displaying protest masculinity
collide with opposing groups that also subscribe to pro-violence masculinity, such as private security,
militarised Public Order Police, and hostile rugby fans.
It is important to note the impact that policing has on collective violence. On the one hand, police are
sometimes absent and unable to prevent collective violence, while on the other hand the police are
sometimes involved in exacerbating levels of violence during protests [213]. An extreme example of
this is the Marikana Massacre in 2012, where police injured 78 and killed 34 miners who were striking
12
The increase in protests and protest violence in 2009, was noted as being correlated with general elections held during
that year, with an increasing number of individuals voicing their frustration during the pre-election period [222].

36
[11]. When police use excessive force in the context of a protest it often escalates the level of protest
violence [11], [213].
3.7. Transport Violence (Taxi Violence)
There is limited literature on transport related violence in South Africa, and of that which has been
written, much of it is focused on taxi violence. Of the limited literature on taxi violence, most of it
focuses on taxi violence occurring prior to 2004.
In 1987 the apartheid government brought in a policy of economic deregulation, providing significant
business opportunity for Black taxi operators who had previously operated under very restrictive and
discriminatory apartheid policies [223], [224]. Owing to these restrictive policies approximately 90%
of taxi permit applications by Black people were denied [223]. Further, in cases where Black taxi
operators received permits, they were restricted to using taxis, which seated a maximum of four
people. Consequently, many Black taxi operators functioned illegally including: functioning without
permits; and from the early 1980s, using 15 seater mini-bus taxis. Following, economic deregulation
and the legalization of the use of minibus taxies – the minibus taxi industry expanded rapidly [223],
[224].
Some have argued that the apartheid government used this swift deregulation as a means to create
intense competition and tension within the Black transport industry, which they hoped would
aggravate political and socio-economic tensions within the Black communities [223]. As the taxi
industry grew, so did the number of rival taxi associations. The Black taxi industry soon became
characterised by conflict and violence between rival taxi associations. The police did little to prevent
or intervene in these taxi wars.
Despite the end of apartheid in 1994, violence within the taxi industry has persisted [223]. Taxi
violence typically occurs as a result of competition between rival taxi associations, for control of taxi
routes. In order to address these high levels of violence, the government sought to re-regulate the
taxi industry. However, when these efforts proved to be unsuccessful, government decided to look
into recapitalizing the taxi industry i.e. completely rebuilding the taxi industry. Issues of cost and
representation initially hampered the recapitalisation process [223], [224].
4. EFFECTIVENESS OF VIOLENCE PREVENTION LEGISLATION, POLICIES AND INTERVENTIONS
There are multiple, interconnected factors contributing to the high rates of violent crime in South
Africa. Consequently, one cannot narrowly focus on challenges of policing strategies and the criminal
justice system, if one wants to effectively address violence [22]. While an intersectoral approach to
addressing violent crime is key, government departments continually struggle to effectively
collaborate and coordinate in addressing the risk factors for violent crime in this country.
4.1. Evidence-Based Interventions
An essential aspect of effective interventions to address violence is that they be evidence-based. The
lack of nationally representative quantitative research on certain forms of violent crime such as sexual
violence against men, violence in tertiary institutions and the workplace, various forms of collective
violence (and the risk factors thereof), transport violence and violence against vulnerable groups,
negatively impacts on the ability to design and develop effective violence prevention and treatment
interventions [98]. Victim surveys, which make use of nationally representative samples, are essential
as they generally provide more accurate prevalence statistics than the SAPS crime statistics, owing to
among other factors – under-reporting to SAPS and poor record keeping by the police. Further,
nationally representative population-based surveys are able to more comprehensively investigate the
nature of the different forms of violence and the risk and protective factors associated with certain
forms of violent crime, which the crime statistics are unable to do. It is also vital that nationally

37
representative longitudinal studies on violent crime are conducted, as they are essential in providing
an understanding of the temporal relationship between risk and protective factors and experiences of
violent crime – something which cross-sectional studies are unable to do.
In order to comprehensively and effectively address violence, South Africa requires investment in
primary, secondary and tertiary level violence prevention interventions [225]. Many of the
interventions recognised as best practice, which are listed below, address a number of common risk
factors for different forms of violence.
4.2. Primary Prevention Interventions
Primary prevention interventions aim to prevent violent incidents from occurring in the first place
[226]. Such interventions include addressing contextual factors and social norms that are risk factors
for violence. Some key examples in this regard are outlined below.
4.2.1. Violence Prevention through Urban Upgrading (VPUU)
Violence Prevention through Urban Upgrading (VPUU) is a programme that aims to reduce violence
and improve safety through re-designing of township spaces. These spaces are also designed to
encourage and enable children and youth to engage in positive recreational and sporting activities,
hereby both improving their well-being and development and reducing their likelihood for engaging
in or being exposed to violent crime [227]. Currently, the VPUU programme has been implemented
in five municipalities within the Western Cape [228].
Evaluation of the efficacy and impact of the VPUU is vital in order to ensure that the intervention is
evidence-based, and to inform policy change. There are, however, a number of challenges faced in
trying to evaluate the VPUU programme. These challenges include the difficulty in measuring the
impact of interventions which address less clearly associated risk factors for violence – such as
education and ‘living conditions’. Consequently, it is difficult to prove the association between the
intervention and violence reduction. Likewise, it is difficult to demonstrate whether the intervention
has immediate safety benefits for individual community members [228].
Secondly, effective evaluation requires the engagement of members of the community in which the
intervention was implemented. This is a particular challenge for the VPUU programme in light of the
provincial government’s role in the intervention, and the reality that the five areas of intervention are
located in opposition strongholds. This has an impact on the willingness of community members to
engage in the evaluation process and may compromise the validity of the data [228].
Research is currently being conducted by UCT’s African Centre of Studies, on the impact of three urban
upgrading projects on safety. Preliminary findings from the VPUU programme in Khayelitsha indicate
that the programme not only appears to have led to decreased experiences of violent crime by
residents, but it has also led to an increased perception of safety [229].
4.2.2. SASA! (Start, Awareness, Support, Action) Activist Kit
SASA! (Start, Awareness, Support, Action) activist kit is an attitudinal and behavioural change
intervention aimed at involving community leaders in addressing GBV and HIV in order to reduce VAW
in their communities and reduce the spread of HIV/AIDS [230]. An evaluation of the intervention in
Uganda, found it to be effective in reducing the normalization and acceptance of IPV as well as a
reduction in reported physical IPV victimization among female participants and a reduction in male
participants having multiple sexual partners [231], [232].
4.2.3. ‘Soul City’ Intervention

38
The Soul City Institute for Health and Development Communication (‘Soul City’) and the National
Network on Violence Against Women developed a DV behavioural intervention which aimed at
reducing the risk for DV at all levels of the socio-ecological model. Intervention strategies included a
multi-media strategy to promote gender equitable attitudes [233].
Radio, television dramas, pamphlets and posters, community events, and a DV helpline were used to
raise awareness and encourage a shift in attitudes and behaviour regarding DV. A national campaign
involving awareness-raising through the media, engaging politicians in community meetings, and
hosting public parliamentary hearings was effective in pressurizing the government and police into
implementing the DVA. Soul City’s intervention was found to play a significant role in ensuring the
implementation of the DVA in 1999. The intervention was also found to be successful in: raising
awareness and changing attitudes towards DV at the individual level; including a large increase in the
number of respondents who believed that DV was not a private matter, but an issue of public concern
[233]. The use of mass media and edutainment appears to be a very effective tool for mobilizing social
change.
4.2.4. Sonke Gender Justice’s ‘One Man Can’ (OMC) Campaign
Sonke Gender Justice’s ‘One Man Can’ (OMC) Campaign engages with, equips and empowers men and
boys with the knowledge and skills to address gender inequitable attitudes and practices, which
enable sexual and domestic violence and increase the transmission of HIV/AIDS. An evaluation of this
intervention found it to be effective in changing gender inequitable attitudes and behaviours related
to VAW and the spread of HIV/ AIDS; including increased reporting of cases of GBV to the police and
NGOs, and an increase in condom use and HIV testing. Not only was it effective in changing gender
inequitable attitudes at the individual level, but it was also found to be effective in changing these
attitudes at the community level [234].
4.2.5. Stepping Stones
Stepping Stones is an intervention aimed at reducing the prevalence of HIV through engaging men and
women in a programme focused on issues pertaining to sexual health and HIV/AIDS [235]. The
intervention also aims at, improving communication in sexual relationships; reducing sexual risk-
taking behaviours; improving attitudes and behaviour with regards to gender equality; and reducing
IPV [236]. Evaluation of the intervention found that interventions, which engage men and women are
effective in reducing sexual risk-taking behaviours, including engagement in transactional sex.
Stepping Stones was also found to be effective in reducing perpetration of physical and sexual IPV
perpetration amongst men [235], [237].
4.2.6. Intervention with Microfinance for AIDS and Gender Equity (IMAGE)
The Intervention with Microfinance for AIDS and Gender Equity (IMAGE) is an intervention with socio-
economically disadvantaged women. It consists of a group-based micro-finance scheme and training
on gender issues and HIV risk-taking behaviour [238]–[240]. The effectiveness of the intervention was
assessed through a cluster randomized control trial. Findings indicated that IMAGE is effective in
empowering women and improving their communication concerning sexual risk-taking behaviours.
The intervention is also effective in reducing male controlling behaviour and physical and sexual IPV.
In the two year follow-up period, the prevalence of IPV in the intervention group, decreased by 55%.
IMAGE illustrated the effectiveness of interventions which empower women both economically, as
well as through training on issues of gender, IPV and sexual risk taking behaviour.
4.2.7. ‘Respect for U’
‘Respect for U’ is an evidence-based intervention aimed at reducing IPV among youth, which is
intended to be implemented in schools, during Life Orientation classes. The South African Medical
Research Council describes the purpose of intervention as being to address ‘’associations between

39
intimate partner violence, ideologies of male superiority, a culture of violence, and alcohol and drug
use. The goals are to increase social support for girls, change norms that support boys’ right to control
girls and insist on sex, increase understanding of substance use in the context of relationships, and
improve communication to prevent the use of violence in relationships [241].’’
4.2.8. School Safety Guidelines
Gevers and Flisher (2012) [242, pp. 206–207] outline recommendations for preventing violence in
schools based on recommendations developed by Burton (2008) [132]. These recommendations are
quoted in the box below:
School Safety Recommendations [242, pp. 206–207]
- The Department of Basic Education should monitor schools’ adherence to minimum
safety standards and efforts at preventing and responding to school violence,
particularly by collecting regular data on school violence and prevention programmes
- School policies and procedures, including a detailed code of conduct, promoting non-violence
and setting out appropriate responses and consequences for violence in accordance with the
Department of Basic Education’s minimum standards of safety need to be implemented and
clearly communicated to all those within the school community.
- School staff need to be taught and supported in effective and appropriate classroom
management and be held accountable for violence within the schools by enforcing school non-
violence policies with appropriate means and any staff who perpetrate violence in the school
need to be swiftly and decisively disciplined.
- Security infrastructure at schools needs to be updated, maintained and monitored to keep the
school premises safe and secure.
- Through collaboration with the SAPS, Department of Social Development and local government
as well as school and community initiatives, the environment surrounding schools should be
cleared of drugs, alcohol and weapons.
- Safe transit to and from schools needs to be established so that learners and educators have
access to reliable, safe and affordable transport between their homes and the school.
- Children and youths experiencing violence in the home or community need to be identified and
provided with appropriate support services, including counselling.
- Planned, co-ordinated and consistent extramural activities should be organised to involve
learners in positive leisure activities after formal school hours.
- Get youths’ input when designing such programmes and be sure to make them available
throughout the year and accessible to all.
- Research efforts need to be increased so that programmes are effectively monitored and
evaluated to inform programme improvement and generalisability to other schools.
4.2.9. Bullying Interventions in Schools
In order to effectively prevent and respond to bullying in schools, schools should ensure the following:
- No tolerance for bullying at the school, this should be included within the school policy, and all
teachers and staff must be trained in how to monitor and intervene when bullying occurs [243];
- Clearly displayed classroom rules against bullying, which outline consequences for such behaviour
[243];
- Children should not be left without supervision when they are at school, as this increases the
likelihood of bullying occurring [244];
- Schools must refrain from victim blaming, and ensure that perpetrators of bullying receive firm
discipline in a timely manner[243];
- Behavioural interventions with children who are identified as bullies, to encourage pro-social
behaviour [243], [244];
- The school should meet with the parents of both the perpetrator and the victim [244].

40
4.3. Secondary and Tertiary Interventions
Secondary interventions focus on intervening in situations where the probability of violence occurring
is high, and/ or intervening shortly after the violent incident has occurred [226]. Tertiary interventions
focus on decreasing the long-term impact of incidents of violence, as well as decreasing the likelihood
of such incidents happening again [226].
4.3.1. Domestic Violence and Child Abuse Screening at Health Centres
For a number of reasons including fear of secondary victimization, self-blame and the fear of
repercussions, many victims of DV in South Africa do not report to the police [245]. Rather, often their
first port of call is health facilities [245]. Consequently, health care centres are in a unique position to
assist in identifying and responding to DV cases. Further, through providing timely and detailed
assessment of presenting DV victims, health care workers can provide essential evidence needed for
issuing protection orders and prosecuting perpetrators [246]. Consequently, it is recommended that
health centres conduct routine DV screening of women and children accessing their services [247],
[248]. Children accessing health centres should also be routinely screened for possible signs of child
abuse.
4.3.2. Parenting Programmes
Article 143 (2) (b) of the Children’s Amendment Act identifies the need for provision of prevention and
early intervention programmes ‘’to families where there are children identified as being vulnerable to
or at risk of harm or removal into alternative care.’’ The purpose of these programmes is detailed in
Article 144, which also outlines interventions which could improve parenting skills including the
training of parents in non-violent parenting methods [249]. Routine child abuse screening at health
centres could assist in identifying children and parents in need of these programmes.
Pregnant mothers attending health centres, who are identified as vulnerable (e.g. show signs of poor
mental health; lack economic and/or social support), should be included within the Early Childhood
Development (ECD) programme ‘’Family and Home-Based Support for Pregnant Women and Children
under 2 Years of Age’’. As part of this programme, Mother and Child Community Workers (MCCWs)
(a) visit vulnerable pregnant mothers and caregivers and mothers with infants below 9 months, on a
regular basis; (b) support and train child minders of 0-2year olds; and (c) register qualifying pregnant
mothers for the CSG and vulnerable caregivers for the CDGs [250].
Vulnerable parents can also be referred for involvement in the ECD Parent Support Programme. This
programme provides parents with information and support concerning development and non-violent
discipline. It aims at empowering parents through (a) promoting positive parenting and avoiding harsh
discipline; (b) providing training on child safety and protective practices; (c) encouraging parent-child
bonding; (d) referral of vulnerable parents (parents who are violent, abuse substances or display
symptoms indicative of mental health disorders) [250].
4.3.3. Bystander Intervention Programmes
There is a growing interest in the efficacy of bystander intervention as a secondary violence prevention
model [251], [252]. Bystanders are people who witness events/ situations [251]. An individual
becomes an active bystander when they intervene in a situation they have witnessed, which they
deem as problematic. Bystanders often refrain from intervening in problematic situation owing to
factors such as diffusion of responsibility, concern that they may be misinterpreting the incident, and
fear of what will happen if they do intervene. Through bystander intervention programmes,
individuals gain an improved sense of self-efficacy and they are trained and equipped to intervene and
offer assistance when they perceive someone to be at risk of violence [251], [252]. Bystander
intervention programmes can also play a role in changing social norms which normalize and accept

41
violence and gender inequitable attitudes and behaviour [251], [253]. In cases of sexual violence,
knowledge about sexual violence and knowing someone who has been a victim of sexual violence
increases the likelihood of a bystander intervening in cases of perceived risk [252]. Bystanders who
have a greater sense of community are also more likely to intervene in situations of possible danger.
Socio-cultural norms concerning gender, violence and ‘masculinity’ also influence the likelihood of
bystander intervention [251], [252]. Bystander intervention programmes are shown to be effective in
university and college settings [251]. An example of this is the ‘Mentors in Violence Prevention Project’
which trains men to intervene in situations where they observe gender inequitable behaviour [253].
4.3.4. Thuthuzela Care Centres
In 2000, South Africa developed Thuthuzela Care Centres (TCCs), which are ‘one-stop’ centres for
victims of sexual violence [254]. There are now over 50 such victim-centred facilities across the
country [254], [255]. These crisis centres provide comprehensive, specialized services for victims of
sexual assault. The services include immediate trauma counselling, post exposure prophylaxis,
forensic examination, referral for longer term counselling, transport from the facility and referral to a
place of safety (if required) [230], [256]. The TCCs also work closely with the Sexual Offence Courts
(SOCs), to ensure that victims receive adequate support if their case goes to court, and to ensure that
key evidence makes it to court [230], [254], [256]. These centres aim to reduce the likelihood of
victims suffering secondary traumatization, increase the conviction rate and decrease the time it takes
for cases to be finalized [255]. In a report published by UN Women in 2011, South Africa’s TCCs were
referred to ‘’as a best practice model internationally’’[257, p. 57].
In 2008, the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) stated that owing to the combined efforts of the
TCCs and the sexual offence courts (SOCs), there has been a 75-95% increase in conviction rates for
rape. Further, case resolution takes an average of 6 months now compared to approximately 18 – 24
months, which was the average period for resolution prior to the establishment of the TCCs [258].
Despite these successes, evaluation of the TCCs has highlighted a number of concerns.
‘’The TCC model is a creature of the NPA and located within a health facility. This design and
management by a prosecutorial function of what is essentially a health service guarantees an
inherent tension within the care centre component of the TCC model. The centres therefore,
attempt to mediate both the interests of the criminal justice system, as well as the public
health system, with the inclusion of NGOs adding, in many instances, yet another layer of
complication [255, p. 10].’’
The inter-sectoral design of TCCs is both a strength and a challenge. This structure aims to provide a
coordinated, multi-disciplinary approach to post-rape care. In practice, a number of difficulties have
arisen in the functioning of the TCCs. These difficulties are often caused by a lack of clarity on the roles
and responsibilities of the various service providers, poor coordination and mismanagement of the
various services and inadequate communication.
The role of TCC lay counsellors is not clearly defined. Consequently there is lack of uniformity and
consistency in the services provided by them at different sites. At some TCCs the medical staff have
been found to be shifting responsibilities to the lay counsellors, e.g. expecting them to conduct HIV
testing [255]. In light of this, there is a need to draw up clearly defined roles and responsibilities for
all service providers working at the TCCs [255].
Another challenge faced by TCCs is funding. Inconsistent funding by the DSD has resulted in disparities
in funding received by TCCs ‘’both within and between provinces’’ [255, p. 11]. Insufficient funding
negatively impacts on the quality and nature of services provided [255]. For example, some TCCs are
not open 24/7 and others lack a number of core services. Emotional support and follow-up services

42
are often not prioritised at the TCCs. Out of 39 TCCs operating in 2014 ‘’...[f]or all but two TCCs, follow-
up of rape survivors posed a significant challenge’’ [255, p. 10]. Owing to the wide variation in the
nature and quality of services offered at the different TCCs, there are significant differences in victims’
perception of services – with some having positive and others very negative experiences. TCCs which
are well established, have a stable core team of staff and which have good working relationships
between service providers are generally found to provide better services. It is essential that the DSD
implement standardized and equitable funding practices for TCCs and increase the overall funding
allocated to these centres, to ensure consistent provision of core services. These core services should
be adequately funded by the DSD and must include psychosocial services and proper follow-up care.
4.3.5. Sexual Offence Courts
South Africa has specialized sexual offence courts (SOCs) for sexual offence cases, as a result of the
Judicial Matters Second Amendment Act 43 of 2013 which amended the SOA to provide for the
development of SOCs [254], [259]. The purpose of the SOCs is to provide adequate support, advice
and protection to victims of sexual offences in order to minimize the likelihood of them suffering
secondary traumatization, such as the provision of separate CCTV rooms, where victims can testify
without having to face their perpetrator [254]. Well-resourced, well-designed and properly staffed
SOCs decrease the likelihood of secondary victimization and have been found to have higher
conviction rates. Problematically, the Judicial Matters Second Amendment Act lacks a clear directive
on who should be responsible for establishing the SOCs. It further does not identify a timeline for the
development of these courts; does not establish a set of minimum requirements regarding staffing
and equipment for these courts; and does not indicate which department is responsible for providing
the resources for these courts. Another cause for concern, is that SOCs have not been systematically
establish across the country [117], [118].
4.3.6. Law Enforcement
As previously mentioned, under apartheid, many of the laws were oppressive and unjust and the
criminal justice system and police were used to repress a large sector (the majority) of the population.
Consequently, many South Africans lack respect for the rule of law [3], [32] and lack confidence in the
criminal justice system because it was previously used to oppress them rather than protect them.
Current challenges in policing and the criminal justice system have exacerbated this lack of trust. The
police and the criminal justice system play a critical role in preventing and responding to violent crime.
A problem in South Africa is the way in which ‘criminal justice agencies’ focusing on reducing rates of
violent crime by measuring reductions in levels of reported crime. This is problematic in that, firstly,
decreased levels of reported crime do not necessarily indicate a decrease in incidents of these crimes
[101], but rather that fewer victims are reporting for reasons such as shame; fear of the perpetrator’s
response; and lack of confidence in law enforcement [98]. Findings from the 2014/15 Victims of Crime
Survey indicated that many South Africans do not report crimes, because they believe that police will
do not nothing about it [17]. Secondly, police could be tempted to desist from opening cases in order
to ‘improve’ their station level crime statistics. Another issue is the high attrition rate and low
conviction rate for violent crimes such as rape [260]. Many of these cases are lost/ dropped during the
reporting and investigating stages [101].
A primary focus of South African law enforcement should be to reduce actual incidents of violent
crime rather than reported incidents. Effective and responsive policing will lead to greater confidence
in the police, consequently leading to improved reporting of violent crimes [9]. Further law
enforcement should identify and address the reasons for the high attrition rate of violent crimes [101].
Increasing the likelihood of punishment for a violent crime, has been argued to be an effective strategy
for reducing violent crime, and a more effective deterrent than increasing the severity of the
punishment for the crime [22]. Further, the time between perpetrating a crime and being held to

43
account for the crime, also effects deterrence, with long delays in response and sentencing of crimes,
weakening the deterrence to perpetrate the crime [22].
The table below lists effective crime prevention, crime detection and crime intelligence strategies as
identified by UCT Centre of Criminology (2015) [21, pp. 15–16]
Crime Prevention, Crime Detection and Crime Intelligence Strategies
taken directly from
UCT Centre of Criminology, ‘’A citizen’s guide to SAPS crime statistics: 1994 to 2015’’ (2015)
[21, pp. 15–16]
Crime Prevention
- Focused visible policing, like patrolling of crime hotspots, roadblocks, stop and search, and
cordon and search operations.
- Identifying environmental factors, which are conducive to crime and informing other
government departments at all levels of government, but especially local government,
about these factors so that they can eliminate it.
- Informing the community/public about trends, hotspots, peak times and modus operandi
to prevent victimisation through raised awareness.
Crime Detection
- Proper crime scene management including fingerprints, ballistics and forensics.
- Clustering of dockets with likely identical suspects and allocating them to the same
investigator/s, and
- Victim support and if necessary protection to ensure a low withdrawal rate.
Crime Intelligence
- Crime mapping and crime pattern analysis to establish crime hotspots and peak times.
- Fieldwork to do environmental scanning of hotspots to establish why the crime occur[s]
there at the specific time, and
- Docket linkage analysis to establish through common suspect descriptions, modus
operandi, targets etc. cases where the perpetrators are in all probability the same to cluster
dockets for detection and task the intelligence collectors.
5. CONCLUSION
Five years since the last REA was completed, a rapid analysis of existing literature suggests that violent
crime remains a significant issue for South Africa. In certain regards, violent crime appears to have
increased. There has been an upturn in the aggravated robbery and attempted murder rate since the
2011/2012 period. Similarly, while the homicide rate decreased by over 50% between 1995 and 2011/
2012 period, there has been a slight but steady increase in the homicide rate from the 2011/ 2012
period. Homicide, as has previously been noted, is one of the most reliable indicators of the level of
violent crime in a country and consequently this trend is worrying. There is no evidenced-based
explanation for the recent upturn in the homicide rate, pointing to the need for in-depth research on
this issue.
The factors associated with violent crime in South Africa were conceptualised in the 2011 REA in terms
of political-historical, environmental and individual factors. The 2011 REA also provided a relatively
short assessment of promising violence prevention interventions in South Africa. As with the 2011
REA, this report found similar key themes with regards to the main political, historical, environmental
and individual factors which have contributed to the high rates of violent crime in South Africa. The
normalization of violence in South African society and the tolerance and approval of violent
expressions of masculinity exacerbate the historical, political and economic tensions which enable
violence. Key facilitating contributors to violent crime were similarly identified in both reports, namely
- alcohol, weapons and drugs. Further, the 2011 and 2016 REAs similarly highlighted how inadequate

44
policy implementation, poor law enforcement and a general lack of respect for the rule of law, have
provided a context in which violent crime can flourish.
This report has added value in a number of ways. Firstly, it has provided an updated analysis of the
nature and extent of violent crime in South Africa. Secondly, through analysis of the risk factors for
violent crime in the country, it has provided a multi-faceted explanation for why the crime is so violent.
Thirdly, it has sought to provide a more comprehensive overview of the extent and nature of the
different categories of violent crime, such as homicide, rape and aggravated robbery. Fourthly, it has
discussed different areas of violent crime. These areas were identified in relation to the indicators in
the World Health Organisation’s Global Status Report on Violence Prevention (2014) and include:
violence against women and children; youth violence; gang violence; collective violence (including
vigilantism, xenophobic violence and protest violence); sexual violence; violence in schools; violence
against orphans, children with disabilities and street children; masculinity and violence; firearm
violence; and transport (taxi) violence. Finally, in comparison with the 2011 REA, this report also
provides a much broader and detailed overview of legislation and interventions designed to prevent
and respond to violence. Based on existing research materials, the strengths and weaknesses in the
legislation and interventions were highlighted.
Through this rapid analysis of the literature, certain key gaps emerged:
- Various gaps in literature on violence against children were identified. Research priorities include:
a) research on the efficacy of CDGs and CSGs in reducing the poverty related risk factors for VAC;
b) an evaluation into the efficacy of the National Strategy for the Prevention and Management of
Alcohol and Drug use amongst Learners in Schools and the National School Safety Framework; c)
conducting prevalence studies on non-fatal firearm violence perpetrated against children; and d)
nationally representative studies to be conducted on the nature and extent of victimization among
vulnerable groups of children in South Africa, including street children and children with
disabilities.
- More research needs to be conducted on different forms of collective violence in South Africa, as
well as on effective interventions to address these forms of violence.
- Research on gang violence in South Africa is limited. Much of the existing research focuses on
‘Coloured’ gangs in the Western Cape. Further, there is a lack of research on tsotsi gangs in Black
townships. Of the research which has been conducted on these gangs, much of it is outdated.
Consequently, there is a need for quantitative, nationally representative studies on gang violence.
It would be helpful to compare the nature and extent of gang violence, the associated risk and
protective factors for it and the similarities and differences between gang violence in different
parts of South Africa.
- There is a need for more prevalence studies on vigilante violence and more quantitative and
qualitative research on xenophobic violence, in order to comprehensively investigate the risk and
protective factors associated with these forms of violence.
- There is a lack of nationally representative studies that investigate the association between illicit
drug use and perpetration of violent crime. This is a research area in urgent need of attention
particularly in light of the widespread abuse of substances such as ‘tik’ in the Western Cape.
- A caveat exists with regards to literature on transport violence. Most of the existing research
concerns taxi violence, particularly focusing on taxi violence prior to 2004. There is a need for
current research on taxi violence, as well as research which explores the nature and extent of
other forms of transport violence.
- There is a lack of large-scale, quantitative studies which investigate the nature and extent of
violence in institutions, and the risk factors for and protective factors against such violence. For
example, there is a need for research on violence in old age homes, hospitals, psychiatric facilities,
universities and workplaces.

45
- A particular gap in the research on violent crime concerns interventions which prevent and
respond to violent crime. This includes the lack of research comprehensively evaluating the
strengths and weaknesses of these interventions and their long term impact. An example of this
is the dearth of research on post-rape services in South Africa [255].
BIBLIOGRAPHY
[1] Office of the Presidency, “The Outcomes Approach,” Office of the Presidency, Pretoria, 2010.
[2] J. W. Swanson, C. E. Holzer, V. K. Ganju, and R. T. Jono, “Violence and Psychiatric Disorder in
the Community: Evidence from the Epidemiologic Catchment Area Surveys,” Hosp.
Community Psychiatry, vol. 41, no. 7, pp. 761–70, 1990.
[3] D. Bruce, A. Dissel, and M. Menziwa, “The violent nature of crime in South Africa: a concept
paper for the Justice, Crime Prevention and Security Cluster,” Braamfontein Cent. Study
Violence Reconcil. CSVR, 2007.

46
[4] A. Van Der Merwe and A. Dawes, “Monitoring child unintentional and violence-related
morbidity and mortality,” in Dawes, A., Bray, R. & Van der Merwe, A. (eds). Monitoring child
well-being: a South African rights-based approach, Cape Town: HSRC Press, 2007, pp. 129–
146.
[5] H. Strydom and S. Schutte, “A Theoretical Perspective on Farm Attacks in the South African
Farming Community,” Acta Criminol., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 115–125, 2005.
[6] A. Louw, “Crime and perceptions after a decade of democracy,” Soc. Indic. Res., vol. 81, no. 2,
pp. 235–255, 2007.
[7] Seedat M, Van Niekerk A, Jewkes R, Suffla S, and Ratele K, “Violence and injuries in South
Africa: prioritising an agenda for prevention.,” Lancet Lond. Engl., vol. 374, no. 9694, pp.
1011–22, 2009.
[8] M. Bandeira and C. Higson-Smith, “Responding to the Smoke that Calls: Principles of
community-level interventions for the prevention of collective violence,” Centre for the Study
of Violence and Reconciliation and the Society, Work and Development Institute, University
of the Witwatersrand, Oct. 2011.
[9] C. Glaser, “Violent crime in South Africa: historical perspectives,” South Afr. Hist. J., vol. 60,
no. 3, pp. 334–352, 2008.
[10] A. Collins, “Violence is not a crime: The impact of ‘acceptable’ violence on South African
Society,” SA Crime Q., no. 43, pp. 29–37, Mar. 2013.
[11] H. Van der Merwe, “Violence as a form of communication: making sense of violence in South
Africa,” Accordr Afr. J. Confl. Resolut., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 65–83, 2013.
[12] H. Donson, “A Profile of Fatal Injuries in South Africa 2008,” MRC-UNISA Crime, Violence and
Injury Lead Programme, Annual Report for South Africa based on the National Injury
Mortality Surveillance System (NIMSS), Nov. 2009.
[13] G. Lamb, “Fighting Fire with an Inferno: The South African Police Service and the ‘War’ on
Violent Crime,” Int. J. Hum. Rights, no. 22, 2015.
[14] J. . Martin, “Vigilantism and informal social control in South Africa,” Acta Criminol., vol. 23,
no. 3, pp. 53–70, 2010.
[15] Republic of South Africa, Constitution of the Republic of South Africa. 1996.
[16] R. Morrel, “Op-Ed: The burning issue of campus violence | Daily Maverick,” 22-Feb-2016.
[Online]. Available: http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2016-02-22-op-ed-the-burning-
issue-of-campus-violence/#.Vs657ObaDhO. [Accessed: 25-Feb-2016].
[17] Statistics South Africa, “Victims of Crime Survey - 2014/15,” Statistics South Africa, Pretoria,
Dec. 2015.
[18] E. G. Krug, L. L. Dahlberg, J. A. Mercy, A. B. Zwi, and R. Lozano, “World Report on Violence and
Health,” World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2002.
[19] World Health Organization, “Global Status Report on Violence Prevention 2014,” WHO,
Geneva, 2014.
[20] ISS Crime Hub, “The Definitions of Crimes used to compile the crime statistics,” ISS Africa.
[Online]. Available: https://www.issafrica.org/crimehub/topics/crime-statistics/the-
definitions-of-crimes-used-to-compile-the-crime-statistics.
[21] C. De Kock, A. Kriegler, and M. Shaw, “A citizen’s guide to SAPS crime statistics: 1994 to
2015,” Centre of Criminology, Faculty of Law, University of Cape Town, Sep. 2015.
[22] K. V. Brown, “THE DETERMINANTS OF CRIME IN SOUTH AFRICA,” South Afr. J. Econ., vol. 69,
no. 2, pp. 269–298, Jul. 2005.
[23] R. Jewkes, L. Penn-Kekana, and H. Rose-Junius, “‘‘If they rape me, I can’t blame them”:
Reflections on gender in the social context of child rape in South Africa and Namibia,” Soc. Sci.
Med., vol. 61, no. 8, pp. 1809–1820, 2005.
[24] R. Jewkes, Y. Sikweyiya, R. Morrell, and K. Dunkle, “Gender inequitable masculinity and sexual
entitlement in rape perpetration South Africa: findings of a cross-sectional study,” PloS One,
vol. 6, no. 12, p. e29590, 2011.

47
[25] N. Abrahams, M. Hoffman, R. Jewkes, and R. Laubsher, “Sexual violence against intimate
partners in Cape Town: prevalence and risk factors reported by men,” Bull. World Health
Organ., vol. 82, no. 5, pp. 330–337, 2004.
[26] N. Abrahams, R. Jewkes, R. Laubscher, and M. Hoffman, “Intimate partner violence:
prevalence and risk factors for men in Cape Town, South Africa,” Violence Vict., vol. 21, no. 2,
pp. 247–264, 2006.
[27] M. Machisa, R. Jewkes, C. Lowe Morna, and K. Rama, “The War @ Home: Gender Based
Violence Indicators Project: Gauteng Research Report,” Gender Links and South African
Medical Research Council, Johannesburg, South Africa, 2011.
[28] A. Plüddemann, C. Parry, H. Donson, and A. Sukhai, “Alcohol use and trauma in Cape Town,
Durban and Port Elizabeth, South Africa: 1999-2001,” Inj. Control Saf. Promot., vol. 11, no. 4,
pp. 265–267, 2004.
[29] G. Kynoch, “Urban Violence in Colonial Africa: A Case for South African Exceptionalism,” J.
South. Afr. Stud., vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 629–645, 2008.
[30] R. Jewkes, N. Abrahams, S. Mathews, M. Seedat, A. Van Niekerk, S. Suffla, and K. Ratele,
“Preventing rape and violence in South Africa: Call for leadership in a new agenda for action,”
MRC Gender and Health Research Unit and MRC Crime Violence & Injury Lead Programme,
Pretoria, South Africa, MRC Policy Brief, Nov. 2009.
[31] T. Petrus and W. Isaacs-Martin, “Reflections on violence and scapegoating in the strike and
protest culture in South Africa,” Afrins Afr. Insight, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 49–61, 2011.
[32] Chandre Gould, “COMMENT: Why is crime and violence so high in South Africa?,” Africa
Check, 17-Sep-2014. .
[33] M. A. Collinson, B. Wolff, S. M. Tollman, and K. Kahn, “Trends in Internal Labour Migration
from Rural Limpopo Province, Male Risk Behaviour, and Implications for the Spread of
HIV/AIDS in Rural South Africa,” J. Ethn. Migr. Stud., vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 633–648, May 2006.
[34] Gender Links, “The War @ Home: Findings of the Western Cape Violence Prevalence Study By
Gender Links,” Gender Links, Johannesburg, South Africa.
[35] A. Dawes, Z. Kafaar, Z. De Sas Kropiwnicki, R. Pather, and L. Richter, “Partner Violence,
Attitudes to Child Discipline & Use of Corporal Punishment: A South African National Survey,”
Child Youth & Family Development, Human Sciences Research Council, Cape Town, South
Africa, 2004.
[36] Central Intelligence Agency, “The World Factbook: Country Comparison: Distribution of
Family Income - Gini Index,” Central Intelligence Agency. [Online]. Available:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2172rank.html.
[37] Jewkes R, Levin J, and Penn-Kekana L, “Risk factors for domestic violence: findings from a
South African cross-sectional study.,” Soc. Sci. Med., vol. 55, no. 9, pp. 1603–1617, 2002.
[38] Mathews S, Abrahams N, Jewkes R, Martin LJ, and Lombard C, “Alcohol use and its role in
female homicides in the Western Cape, South Africa.,” J. Stud. Alcohol Drugs, vol. 70, no. 3,
pp. 321–7, 2009.
[39] J. Slater, “Gender voicelessness and violence in South Africa: the inner hyprocrisy of moral
ambiguity,” Scr. Scriptura Int. J. Bible Relig. Theol. South. Afr., vol. 112, pp. 1–12, 2013.
[40] UNODC, “Global Study on Homicide 2013,” United Nations, 2013.
[41] South African Police Service, Annual Report 2014/2015: South African Police Service. SAPS
Strategy, Research, Monitoring and Evaluation, 2015.
[42] P. Burton and L. Leoschut, “School Violence in South Africa: Results of the 2012 National
School Violence Study,” Centre for Justice and Crime Prevention, Cape Town, South Africa,
2013.
[43] R. Jewkes, K. Dunkle, M. Nduna, P. N. Jama, and A. Puren, “Associations between childhood
adversity and depression, substance abuse and HIV and HSV2 incident infections in rural
South African youth,” Child Abuse Negl., vol. 34, no. 11, pp. 833–841, Nov. 2010.

48
[44] S. Naidoo, “A profile of the oro-facial injuries in child physical abuse at a children’s hospital,”
Child Abuse Negl., vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 521–534, 2000.
[45] F. Meinck, L. D. Cluver, and M. E. Boyes, “Physical, emotional and sexual abuse of children in
South Africa: Prevalence, incidence, perpetrators, and locations of child abuse victimization in
a large community sample – a cohort study,” Under review.
[46] S. Mathews, N. Abrahams, R. Jewkes, L. J. Martin, and C. Lombard, “The epidemiology of child
homicides in South Africa,” Bull. World Health Organ., vol. 91, pp. 562–568, 2013.
[47] L. C. Simbayi, S. C. Kalichman, S. Jooste, V. Mathiti, D. Cain, and C. Cherry, “HIV/AIDS Risks
among South African Men Who Report Sexually Assaulting Women,” Am. J. Health Behav.,
vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 158–166, Mar. 2006.
[48] R. Jewkes, Y. Sikweyiya, R. Morrell, and K. Dunkle, “Understanding men’s health and use of
violence: Interface of Rape and HIV in South Africa,” Medical Research Council, Pretoria,
2009.
[49] R. Jewkes, M. Nduna, N. J. Shai, and K. Dunkle, “Prospective study of rape perpetration by
young South African men: Incidence and risk factors,” PloS One, vol. 7, no. 5, p. e38210, 2012.
[50] M. Nduna, R. Jewkes, K. L. Dunkle, N. P. J. Shai, and I. Colman, “Associations between
depressive symptoms, sexual behaviour and relationship characteristics: a prospective cohort
study of young women and men in the Eastern Cape, South Africa,” J. Int. AIDS Soc., vol. 13,
no. 1, p. 44, Jan. 2010.
[51] Gender Links, “The War at Home: Gender Based Violence Indicators Project, Limpopo
Research Report,” South Africa, 2011.
[52] J. Woodhams and G. Labuschagne, “South African serial rapists: The offenders, their victims,
and their offenses,” Sex. Abuse J. Res. Treat., vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 544–574, 2012.
[53] L. Vetten, R. Jewkes, R. Sigsworth, N. Christofides, L. Loots, and O. Dunseith, “Tracking
Justice : The Attrition of Rape Cases through the Criminal Justice System in Gauteng,”
Tshwanaragang Legal Advocacy Centre to End Violence Against Women, Medical Research
Council & Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation, 2008.
[54] Dunkle KL, Jewkes RK, Brown HC, Yoshihama M, Gray GE, McIntyre JA, and Harlow SD,
“Prevalence and patterns of gender-based violence and revictimization among women
attending antenatal clinics in Soweto, South Africa.,” Am. J. Epidemiol., vol. 160, no. 3, pp.
230–9, 2004.
[55] Gender Links, “The War @ Home: Findings of the Gender Based Violence Prevalence Study in
Gauteng, Western Cape, KwaZulu Natal and Limpopo Provinces of South Africa,” 2012.
[56] R. Jewkes, K. Dunkle, M. P. Koss, J. B. Levin, M. Nduna, N. Jama, and Y. Sikweyiya, “Rape
perpetration by young, rural South African men: Prevalence, patterns and risk factors,” Soc.
Sci. Med., vol. 63, no. 11, pp. 2949–2961, 2006.
[57] J. Corrigall, “Violence, alcohol misuse and mental health : gaps in the health system’s
response : social and environmental determinants of health,” South Afr. Health Rev., pp. 103–
114, 2012.
[58] G. F. R. Ellis, Substance use and abuse in South Africa: insights from brain and behavioural
sciences. Cape Town: UCT Press, 2012.
[59] Sean Kaliski, Characteristics of Perpetrators of Intimate Partner Femicide: A 10 Year Study. 1st
South African Homicide Research Colloquium, The River Club, Cape Town, South Africa, 2015.
[60] van Heerden MS, Grimsrud AT, Seedat S, Myer L, Williams DR, and Stein DJ, “Patterns of
substance use in South Africa: results from the South African Stress and Health study.,” South
Afr. Med. J. Suid-Afr. Tydskr. Vir Geneeskd., vol. 99, no. 5, pp. 358–66, 2009.
[61] S. Pasche and B. Myers, “Substance misuse trends in South Africa: SUBSTANCE MISUSE
TRENDS IN SOUTH AFRICA,” Hum. Psychopharmacol. Clin. Exp., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 338–341,
May 2012.

49
[62] M. Prinsloo, “A profile of fatal injuries in South Africa: 7th annual report of the National Injury
Mortality Surveillance System (NIMSS),” MRC-UNISA Crime, Violence and Injury Lead
Programme, Tygerberg, 2007.
[63] H. Donson, “A Profile of Fatal Injuries in South Africa - 2007,” MRC-UNISA Crime, Violence and
Injury Lead Programme, 2008.
[64] K. L. Dunkle, R. K. Jewkes, M. Nduna, J. Levin, N. Jama, N. Khuzwayo, M. P. Koss, and N.
Duvvury, “Perpetration of partner violence and HIV risk behaviour among young men in the
rural Eastern Cape, South Africa,” AIDS, vol. 20, no. 16, pp. 2107–2114, 2006.
[65] Government Gazette, “Liquor Policy Review: A discussion document for public consultation,
No. 38808, Notice 446,.” 20-May-2015.
[66] B. Myers, “Alcohol and drug abuse: removing structural barriers to treatment for historically
disadvantaged communities in Cape Town,” Int. J. Soc. Welf., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 156–165,
2008.
[67] A. Kriegler and M. Shaw, “South Africa’s mysterious murder rate,” Daily Maverick, 02-Oct-
2015. [Online]. Available: http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2015-10-02-south-africas-
mysterious-murder-rate/#.VpOMjvl942x. [Accessed: 11-Jan-2016].
[68] South African Police Service, “Crime Statistics of Republic of South Africa 2014/2015,” South
African Police Service, Sep. 2015.
[69] South African Police Service, “Crime Categories: Figures and Ratios,” South African Police
Service, Pretoria, 2014.
[70] K. Ratele, S. Suffla, S. Lazarus, and A. Van Niekerk, “Towards the Development of a
Responsive, Social Science-informed, Critical Public Health Framework on Male Interpersonal
Violence,” Soc. Change, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 415–438, 2010.
[71] Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation, “Streets of Pain, Streets of Sorrow. The
Circumstances of the Occurance of Murder in Six Areas with High Murder Rates,” Centre for
the Study of Violence and Reconciliation, Johannesburg, 2008.
[72] N. Abrahams and R. Jewkes, “Effects of South African men’s having witnessed abuse of their
mothers during childhood on their levels of violence in adulthood,” Am. J. Public Health, vol.
95, no. 10, pp. 1811–1815, 2005.
[73] R. Matzopoulos, M. Prinsloo, D. Bradshaw, V. Pillay-van Wyk, N. Gwebushe, S. Mathews, L.
Martin, R. Laubscher, C. Lombard, and N. Abrahams, “The Injury Mortality Survey: A National
Study of Injury Mortality Levels and Causes in South Africa in 2009,” 2013.
[74] R. Matzopoulos, M. Prinsloo, V. Pillay-van Wyk, N. Gwebushe, S. Mathews, L. Martin, R.
Laubscher, N. Abrahams, W. Msemburi, C. Lombarda, and D. Bradshaw, “Injury-related
mortality in South Africa: A Retrospective Descriptive Study of Postmortem Investigations,”
Bull. World Health Organ., 2015.
[75] M. Wilson and M. Daly, “Competitiveness, risk taking, and violence: the young male
syndrome,” Ethol. Sociobiol. Ethol. Sociobiol., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 59–73, 1985.
[76] J. Mouzos, “Homicidal Encounters: A Study of Homicide in Australia 1989-1999,” Australian
Institute of Criminology Canberra, 2000.
[77] R. Matzopoulos, “Alcohol and Injuries - A Clear Link: Editorial,” South. Afr. J. Epidemiol. Infect.,
vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 114–115, 2005.
[78] S. Kramer and K. Ratele, “Young Black Men’s Risk to Firearm Homicide in Night Time
Johannesburg, South Africa: a Retrospective Analysis based on the National Injury Mortality
Surveillance System,” Afr. J. Saf. Promot., vol. 10, no. 1, 2012.
[79] C. L. Ward, “‘It feels like it’s the end of the world’: Cape Town’s young people talk about
gangs and community violence,” Human Sciences Research Council, Cape Town, Report to the
Institute for Security Studies on the child participation study in support of the COAV Cities
Project, 2006.
[80] J. Steinberg, The Number. Cape Town: Jonathan Ball Publishers, 2004c.

50
[81] South African Police Service, “Annual Report of the National Commissioner of the South
African Police Service 1 April 2002 to 31 March 2003,” S. A. P. Service, Pretoria, 2003a.
[82] South African Police Service, “Annual Report of the National Commissioner of the South
African Police Service 1 April 2004 to 31 March 2005,” South African Police Service, Pretoria,
2005b.
[83] South African Police Service, “SAPS Annual Report 2008/09,” South African Police Service,
Pretoria, 2009.
[84] South African Police Service, “SAPS Annual Report 2010/11,” South African Police Service,
Pretoria, 2011d.
[85] L. A. Swart, M. Seedat, and J. Nel, “Adolescent Homicide Victimization in Johannesburg, South
Africa: Incidence and Epidemiological Characteristics (2001–2009),” Int. J. Inj. Contr. Saf.
Promot., pp. 1–9, Jun. 2015.
[86] L. Swart, M. Seedat, and J. Nel, “The Situational Context of Adolescent Homicide Victimization
in Johannesburg, South Africa,” J. Interpers. Violence, 2015.
[87] K. Ratele, “Watch Your Man: Young Black Males at Risk of Homicidal Violence,” SA Crime Q.,
vol. 33, pp. 19–24, 2009.
[88] S. Lazarus, S. Tonsing, K. Ratele, and A. Van Niekerk, “An Exploratory Study into the Risk and
Protective Factors to Male Interpersonal Violence: Research Report July 2009,” MRC and
UNISA, Cape Town, 2009.
[89] J. Redpath, R. Morrell, R. Jewkes, and P. Peacock, “Masculinities and Public Policy in South
Africa: Changing Masculinities and Working Toward Gender Equality,” Sonke Gender
Network, Johannesburg, 2008.
[90] R. Chetty, “The Role of Firearms in Crime in South Africa,” in Firearm Use and Distribution in
South Africa, R. Chetty (ed.)., Pretoria: National Crime Prevention Centre, 2000, pp. 16–29.
[91] Department of Community Safety, “The Effect of Firearm Legislation on Crime: Western
Cape,” Western Cape Provincial Government, Cape Town, 2015.
[92] D. Bruce, “The One’s in the Pile Were the One’s Going Down. The Reliability of Violent Crime
Statistics,” SA Crime Q., pp. 9–17, 2010b.
[93] A. Altbeker, “Murder and Robbery in South Africa: A Tale of Two Trends,” in In Van Niekerk,
A., Suffla, S. & Seedat, M. (Eds)., Crime, Violence and Injury Prevention in South Africa: Data to
Action, Tygerberg, South Africa: Medical Research Council - University of South Africa Crime,
Violence and Injury Lead Programme, 2008, pp. 131–160.
[94] South African Police Service, “Annual Performance Plan for the South African Police Service
2008/2009,” South African Police Service, Pretoria, 2008b.
[95] Banking Council of South Africa, Bank robberies, ATM & Commercial Crime, Vehicle Theft.
1999.
[96] Republic of South Africa, “10 Years of Policing in a Democracy 1995 - 2005,” 2005.
[97] South African Police Service, “South African Police Service Annual Report 2003/2004,” South
African Police Service, Pretoria, 2004.
[98] L. Vetten, “Rape and other forms of sexual violence in South Africa,” Institute for Security
Studies, Policy Brief 72, Nov. 2014.
[99] UBS Optimus Foundation, “Research Bulletin: Optimus Study on Child Abuse, Neglect and
Violence in South Africa,” Centre for Justice and Crime Prevention, 2015.
[100] Jewkes R and Abrahams N, “The epidemiology of rape and sexual coercion in South Africa: an
overview.,” Soc. Sci. Med. 1982, vol. 55, no. 7, pp. 1231–44, 2002.
[101] L. Artz and D. Smythe, “Losing Ground? Making sense of attrition in rape cases,” SA Crime Q.,
vol. 22, pp. 13–20, Dec. 2007.
[102] Rape Crisis Cape Town Trust, “Rape in South Africa,” Rape Crisis Cape Town Trust. [Online].
Available: http://rapecrisis.org.za/about-rape/. [Accessed: 02-Nov-2016].
[103] Statistics South Africa, “Social profile of vulnerable groups in South Africa, 2002-2011,”
Pretoria, South Africa, Mar. 2012.

51
[104] M. Makoae, H. Roberts, and C. L. Ward, “Child Maltreatment Prevention Readiness
Assessment: South Africa,” Human Sciences Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa,
Report submitted to the World Health Organisation Department of Violence and Injury
Prevention and Disability, Geneva, 2012.
[105] A. Delaney, Z. Ismael, L. Graham, and Y. Ramkissoon, “Review of the Child Support Grant:
Uses, Implementation and Obstacles,” Department of Social Development, Community
Agency for Social Enquiry, South African Social Security Agency & UNICEF, Pretoria, 2008.
[106] South African Social Security Agency & UNICEF, “Preventing Exclusion from the Child Support
Grant: A Study of Exclusion Errors in Accessing CSG Benefits,” UNICEF South Africa, Pretoria,
South Africa, 2013.
[107] D. Budlender, J. Burns, and I. Woolard, “Analysis of Survey Data on the Impact of Social
Security Grants,” Department of Social Development, Pretoria, South Africa, 2008.
[108] C. De Koker, L. De Waal, and V. Vorster, “A Profile of Social Security Beneficiaries in South
Africa,” Department of Sociology and Social Anthropology, Stellenbosch University,
Stellenbosch, 2006.
[109] P. Martin, “Children’s Right to Social Assistance: A review of South Africa’s Child Support
Grant,” in Proudlock P (ed) South Africa’s Progress in Realising Children’s Rights: A Law
Review’’, Cape Town: Children’s Institute, University of Cape Town & Save the Children South
Africa, 2014.
[110] P. Martin, “Children’s Right to Social Assistance: A review of South Africa’s Child Support
Grant,” Proudlock P (ed) South Africa’s Progress in Realising Children’s Rights: A Law Review.,
Cape Town: Children’s Institute, University of Cape Town & Save the Children South Africa,
2014.
[111] P. Martin, P. Proudlock, and L. Berry, “The Rights of Children With Disabilities to Social
Assistance: A review of South Africa’s Care Dependency Grant,” in Proudlock, P (ed) South
Africa’s Progress in Realising Children’s Rights: A Law Review’’, Cape Town: Children’s
Institute, University of Cape Town & Save the Children South Africa, 2014.
[112] Centre for Justice and Crime Prevention, “National School Safety Framework,” Department of
Basic Education.
[113] Department of Basic Education, “National Strategy for the Prevention and Management of
Alcohol and Drug use amongst Learners in Schools,” Pretoria, 2013.
[114] Department of Justice and Constitutional Development of the Republic of South Africa, “Draft
Policy: Specialisation of Services for Victims of Sexual Offences,” Department of Justice and
Constitutional Development of the Republic of South Africa, Draft Policy, 2012.
[115] Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, “The National Policy Framework on
Management of Sexual Offences.” 2013.
[116] K. Naidoo, “Rape in South Africa - A call to action,” S. Afr. Med. J., vol. 103, no. 4, pp. 2010 –
2011, Apr. 2013.
[117] Sonke Gender Justice, “Sexual Offences Act Implementation,” Sonke Gender Justice. .
[118] L. Vetten, “The Right and The Real: A Shadow Report Analysing Selected Government
Departments’ Implementation of the Domestic Violence Act and 2007 Sexual Offences Act,”
Tshwanarang Legal Advocacy Centre, 2007.
[119] L. Artz, “Fear or Failure? Why Victims of Domestic Violence Retract from the Criminal Justice
Process,” South Afr. Crime Q., vol. 37, pp. 3–10, 2011.
[120] Department of Social Development, “Minimum Standards on Shelters for Abused Women
Pretoria,” DSD, Pretoria, 2011.
[121] T. R. Thurman and R. Kidman, “Child maltreatment at home: Prevalence among orphans and
vulnerable children in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa,” Tulane University School of Public Health
and Tropical Medicine, Tulane, L.A., 2011.

52
[122] P. D. Carey, J. L. Walker, W. Rossouw, S. Seedat, and D. J. Stein, “Risk indicators and
psychopathology in traumatised children and adolescents with a history of sexual abuse -
Springer,” Eur. Child Adolesc. Psychol., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 93–98, 2008.
[123] F. Meinck, L. D. Cluver, M. E. Boyes, and L. D. Ndhlovu, “Risk and Protective Factors for
Physical and Emotional Abuse Victimisation amongst Vulnerable Children in South Africa,”
Child Abuse Rev., 2013.
[124] S. N. Madu and K. Peltzer, “Risk factors and child sexual abuse among secondary school
students in the Northern Province (South Africa),” Child Abuse Negl., vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 259–
268, Feb. 2000.
[125] F. Meinck, L. Cluver, and M. E. Boyes, “Family AIDS, poverty and child abuse victimisation:
Findings from South Africa’s first prospective study,” Child Abuse Negl., under review.
[126] G. E. Gray, R. Van Niekerk, H. Struthers, A. Violari, N. Martinson, J. McIntryre, and V. Naidoo,
“The effects of adult morbidity and mortality on household welfare and the well-being of
children in Soweto,” Vulnerable Child. Youth Stud. Int. Interdiscip. J. Res. Policy Care, vol. 1,
no. 1, pp. 15–28, 2006.
[127] L. Cluver, M. Orkin, M. Boyes, F. Gardner, and F. Meinck, “Transactional sex amongst AIDS-
orphaned and AIDS-affected adolescents predicted by abuse and extreme poverty,” JAIDS J.
Acquir. Immune Defic. Syndr., vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 336–343, 2011.
[128] L. Chang, D. Schwartz, K. A. Dodge, and C. McBride-Chang, “Harsh parenting in relation to
child emotion regulation and aggression,” J. Fam. Psychol., vol. 17, no. 4, p. 598, 2003.
[129] E. T. Gershoff, “Corporal punishment by parents and associated child behaviors and
experiences: a meta-analytic and theoretical review,” Psychol. Bull., vol. 128, no. 4, p. 539,
2002.
[130] S. Mathews, R. Jewkes, and N. Abrahams, “‘I had a Hard Life’: Exploring Childhood Adversity
in the Shaping of Masculinities among Men Who Killed an Intimate Partner in South Africa,”
Br. J. Criminol., vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 960–977, 2011.
[131] S. N. Madu, S. E. Idemudia, and A. S. Jegede, “Some perceived parental undesirable
behaviours predicting child sexual, physical and emotional abuse: A study among a sample of
university students in South Africa,” J. Soc. Sci., vol. 7, pp. 111–119, 2003.
[132] P. Burton, “Merchants, Skollies and Stones: Experiences of school violence in South Africa,”
Centre for Justice and Crime Prevention, Cape Town, South Africa, 2008.
[133] A. Bandura, Social Learning Theory. Eaglewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1977.
[134] N. K. Morojele and J. S. Brook, “Substance use and multiple victimisation among adolescents
in South Africa,” Addict. Behav., vol. 31, no. 7, pp. 1163–1176, 2006.
[135] S. N. Madu, E. Idemudia, and A. S. Jegede, “Perceived Parental Disorders as Risk Factors for
Child Sexual, Physical and Emotional Abuse among High School Students in the Mpumalanga
Province, South Africa,” J. Soc. Sci., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 103–112, 2002.
[136] J. S. Brook, N. K. Morojele, K. Pahl, and D. W. Brook, “Predictors of drug use among South
African adolescents,” J. Adolesc. Health., vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 26–34, 2006.
[137] L. Leoschut, “Running Nowhere Fast: Results of the 2008 National Youth Lifestyle Study,”
Centre for Justice and Crime Prevention, Cape Town, South Africa, 2009.
[138] L. Leoschut and P. Burton, “How rich the rewards: Results of the 2005 National Youth
Victimisation Study,” Centre for Justice and Crime Prevention, Cape Town, South Africa, 2006.
[139] A. J. Flisher, L. Myer, A. Mèrais, C. Lombard, and P. Reddy, “Prevalence and correlates of
partner violence among South African adolescents,” J. Child Psychol. Psychiatry, vol. 48, no. 6,
pp. 619–627, 2007.
[140] S. P. Reddy, S. James, R. Sewpaul, F. Koopman, F. I. Funani, S. Sifunda, J. Josie, P. Masuka, N. S.
Kambaran, and R. G. Omardien, “Umthente, Uhlaba, Usamila: The 2nd South African National
Youth Risk Behaviour Survey 2008,” Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa,
2010.

53
[141] N. Ngqela and A. Lewis, “Exploring adolescent learners’ experiences of school violence in a
township high school,” Child Abuse Res. South Afr. J., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 87–97, 2012.
[142] P. Burton, L. Leoschut, and A. Bonora, “Walking the tightrope: Youth resilience to crime in
South Africa,” Centre for Justice and Crime Prevention, Cape Town, South Africa, 2009.
[143] L. Cluver, L. Bowes, and F. Gardner, “Risk and protective factors for bullying victimization
among AIDS-affected and vulnerable children in South Africa,” Child Abuse Negl., vol. 34, no.
10, pp. 793–803, 2010.
[144] A. J. Flisher, C. L. Ward, H. Liang, H. Onya, N. Mlisa, S. Terblanche, A. Bhana, C. D. Parry, and C.
J. Lombard, “Injury-related behaviour among South African high-school students at six sites,”
S. Afr. Med. J., vol. 96, no. 9, pp. 825–830, Oct. 2006.
[145] H. Liang, A. J. Flisher, and C. J. Lombard, “Bullying, violence, and risk behaviour in South
African school students,” Child Abuse Negl., vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 161–171, 2007.
[146] L. N. Mlisa, C. L. Ward, A. J. Flisher, and C. J. Lombard, “Bullying at Rural High Schools in the
Eastern Cape Province, South Africa: Prevalence, and Risk and Protective Factors at School
and in the Family,” J. Psychol. Afr., vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 261–267, 2008.
[147] L. Jones, M. A. Bellis, S. Wood, K. Hughes, E. McCoy, L. Eckley, G. Bates, C. Mikton, T.
Shakespeare, and A. Officer, “Prevalence and risk of violence against children with disabilities:
A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies,” The Lancet, vol. 380, no.
9845, pp. 899–907, Sep. 2012.
[148] DSD, DWCPD, and UNICEF, “Violence against Children in South Africa,” Department of Social
Development/Department of Women, Children and People with Disabilities/UNICEF, Pretoria,
South Africa, 2012.
[149] G. Saloojee, M. Phohole, H. Saloojee, and C. Ijsselmuiden, “Unmet health, welfare and
educational needs of disabled children in an impoverished South African peri-urban
township,” Child Care Health Dev., vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 230–235, 2007.
[150] M. Deroukakis, “A retrospective analysis of children with and without disabilities attending
the Teddy Bear Clinic, Johannesburg,” Master’s Dissertation, University of the Witwatersrand,
Johannesburg, South Africa, 2010.
[151] C. L. Ward and J. R. Seager, “South African Street Children: A Survey and Recommendations
for Services,” Dev. South. Afr., vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 85–100, 2010.
[152] G. Clacherty and J. Walker, “Including Street Children: A Situational Analysis of Street Children
in Durban, South Africa,” Street Action, London, United Kingdom, 2011.
[153] W. J. Schurink and M. Maphatane, “Street children: An investigation into the causes and
incidence of the problem of black street children in the RSA with the aim to develop a model
for treatment, rehabilitation and prevention programmes,” Human Sciences Research
Council, Pretoria, South Africa, 1993.
[154] R. P. Baker, “Children of the Street: A re-interpretation based on evidence from Durban,
South Africa,” Centre for Developing Areas Research, University of London, 1999.
[155] L. Berry, L. Biersteker, A. Dawes, L. Lake, and C. E. Smith, South African Child Gauge 2013.
Cape Town, South Africa: Children’s Institute, University of Cape Town, 2013.
[156] L. Holborn and G. Eddy, “First steps to healing the South African family,” South African
Institute of Race Relations, Johannesburg, South Africa, 2011.
[157] People Opposing Women Abuse and AIDS Legal Network, “Criminal Injustice: Violence Against
Women in South Africa,” Shadow Report on Beijing +15, 2010.
[158] D. Simonovic, “Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, its causes and consequences
finalizes country visit to South Africa,” OHCHR, Pretoria, Dec. 2015.
[159] ISS Africa, “ISS Crime Hub: Victimisation Surveys,” ISS Africa. [Online]. Available:
https://www.issafrica.org/crimehub/crime-analysis/victimisation-surveys. [Accessed: 12-Jan-
2016].

54
[160] K. L. Dunkle, R. Jewkes, H. C. Brown, G. E. Gray, J. A. McIntyre, and S. D. Harlow, “Gender-
based violence, relationship power, and risk of HIV infection in women attending antenatal
clinics in South Africa,” The Lancet, vol. 363, no. 9419, pp. 1415–1421, 2004.
[161] K. L. Dunkle, R. Jewkes, H. C. Brown, G. E. Gray, J. A. McIntryre, and S. D. Harlow,
“Transactional sex among women in Soweto, South Africa: Prevalence, risk factors and
association with HIV infection,” Soc. Sci. Med., vol. 59, no. 8, pp. 1581–1592, 2004.
[162] M. E. Hogue, M. Hogue, and S. B. Kader, “Prevalence and experience of domestic violence
among rural pregnant women in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa: original research,” South. Afr. J.
Epidemiol. Infect., vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 34–37, 2009.
[163] T. Shefer, L. Clowes, and T. Vergnani, “Narratives of transactional sex on a university campus,”
Cult. Health Sex., vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 435–47, Jan. 2012.
[164] F. Boonzaier and S. van Schalkwyk, “Narrative Possibilities: Poor Women of Color and the
Complexities of Intimate Partner Violence,” Violence Women, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 267–286,
2011.
[165] A. M. Fox, S. S. Jackson, N. B. Hansen, N. Gasa, M. Crewe, and K. J. Sikkema, “In their own
voices a qualitative study of women’s risk for intimate partner violence and HIV in South
Africa,” Violence Women, vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 583–602, 2007.
[166] R. K. Jewkes, J. B. Levin, and L. A. Penn-Kekana, “Gender inequalities, intimate partner
violence and HIV preventive practices: Findings of a South African cross-sectional study,” Soc.
Sci. Med., vol. 56, no. 1, pp. 125–34, Jan. 2003.
[167] F. Boonzaier and C. de La Rey, “‘He’s a Man, and I’m a Woman’: Cultural Constructions of
Masculinity and Femininity in South African Women’s Narratives of Violence,” Violence
Women, vol. 9, no. 8, pp. 1003–1029, 2003.
[168] L. Artz and S. Roehrs, “The Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment
Act (no. 32 of 2007): Emerging issues for the health sector,” Contin. Med. Educ., vol. 27, no.
10, pp. 464–466, 2009.
[169] M. E. Young, M. A. Nosek, C. Howland, G. Chanpong, and D. H. Rintala, “Prevalence of abuse
of women with physical disabilities,” Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil., vol. 78, no. 12, pp. S34–S38,
1997.
[170] Statistics South Africa, “General Household Survey 2012,” Statistics South Africa, Pretoria,
South Africa, 2013.
[171] K. Wood, H. Lambert, and R. Jewkes, ““Injuries are beyond love’: Young South Africans’
understandings of limit and legitimacy in relation to physical violence in their sexual
relationships,” Med. Anthropol. Cross-Cult. Stud. Health Illn., vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 43–69, 2008.
[172] F. Boonzaier and C. de La Rey, “Woman abuse: The construction of gender in women and
men’s narratives of violence,” South Afr. J. Psychol., vol. 34, no. 3, p. 443, 2004.
[173] F. Boonzaier, “‘If the man says you must sit, then you must sit’: The relational construction of
woman abuse: Gender, subjectivity and violence,” Fem. Psychol., vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 183–206,
2008.
[174] L. M. Richter and A. R. L. Dawes, “Child abuse in South Africa: rights and wrongs,” CAR Child
Abuse Rev., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 79–93, 2008.
[175] U. Lau and G. Stevens, “Textual transformations of subjectivity in men’s talk of gender-based
violence,” Fem. Psychol., vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 423–442, Mar. 2009.
[176] United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, “2011 Global Study on Homicide: Trends, Context,
Data,” United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Vienna, 2011.
[177] National Injury Mortality Surveillance System, “A Profile of Fatal Injuries in South Africa
1999,” Medical Research Council and UNISA, Johannesburg, 2000.
[178] N. Abrahams, S. Mathews, R. Jewkes, L. J. Martin, and C. Lombard, “Every Eight Hours:
Intimate femicide in South Africa 10 years later,” Medical Research Council, Cape Town, Aug.
2012.

55
[179] N. Abrahams, R. Jewkes, and S. Mathews, “Guns and gender-based violence in South Africa,”
S. Afr. Med. J., vol. 100, no. 9, pp. 586–588, 2010.
[180] N. S. Abrahams, S. Mathews, L. J. Martin, C. Lombard, and R. Jewkes, “Intimate Partner
Femicide in South Africa in 1999 and 2009,” PLoS Med., vol. 10, no. 4, p. e1001412, 2013.
[181] Statistics South Africa, “Victims of Crime Survey 2011,” Statistics South Africa, Pretoria,
2012a.
[182] C. L. Ward, A. Van Der Merwe, and A. Dawes, Youth Violence: Sources and Solutions in South
Africa. Claremont: University of Cape Town Press, 2013.
[183] N. Campbell, J. Colville, Y. Van der Heyde, and A. Van As, “Firearm Injuries to Children in Cape
Town, South Africa: Impact of the 2004 Firearms Control Act,” S. Afr. J. Surg., vol. 51, no. 3,
pp. 92–96.
[184] R. G. Matzopoulos, M. L. Thompson, and J. E. Myers, “Firearm and Nonfirearm Homicide in 5
South African Cities: A Retrospective Population-Based Study.,” Am. J. Public Health, vol. 104,
no. 3, 2014.
[185] D. Jacobs and R. M. O’Brien, “The Determinants of Deadly Force: A Structural Analysis of
Police Violence,” Am. J. Sociol., vol. 103, no. 4, pp. 837–862, 1998.
[186] Dale W. Willits and Jeffrey S. Nowacki, “Police organisation and deadly force: an examination
of variation across large and small cities,” Polic. Soc., vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 63–80, 2014.
[187] G. Fondevila and R. Meneses Reyes, “The Problems and Promises of Research on Deaths Due
to Legal Intervention in Latin America,” Homicide Stud., pp. 1–14, Sep. 2014.
[188] D. Bruce, “Interpreting the Body Count: South African Statistics on Lethal Police Violence,”
South Afr. Rev. Sociol., vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 141–159, 2005.
[189] D. Bruce, “An Acceptable Price to Pay? The Use of Lethal Force by Police in South Africa,”
Open Society Foundation for South Africa, Cape Town, 2010a.
[190] Commission of Inquiry Regarding the Prevention of Public Violence and Intimidation, “Final
Report on Attacks on Members of the South African Police,” 1994.
[191] South African Police Service, “South African Police Service Annual Report 2012/13,” South
African Police Service, Pretoria, 2013a.
[192] N. Mthethwa, “Address by the Minister of Police, at the Funeral Service of the Late Major
General Tirhani Maswanganyi,” SAPS Detective Academy Hall, Hammanskraal, Gauteng, 27-
Jun-2013.
[193] L. Vetten, “Invisible girls and violent boys: Gender and gangs in South Africa,” Dev. Update,
vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 5–8, 2000.
[194] S. Mokwena, “The Era of the Jackrollers: Contextualising the rise of the youth gangs in
Soweto,” presented at the Seminar No.7, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, 30-
Oct-1991.
[195] G. Kynoch, “From the Ninevites to the hard livings gang: Township gangsters and urban
violence in twentieth-century South Africa,” Afr. Stud., vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 55–85, 1999.
[196] A. Standing, Organised crime: A study from the Cape Flats. Institute for Security Studies, 2006.
[197] I. Kinnes, “Gangs, drugs and policing the Cape Flats,” Acta Criminol., pp. 14–26, 2014.
[198] C. L. Ward and A. Cooper, “Gangs and Child Safety,” in Crime, Violence and Injury in South
Africa: 21st Century Solutions for Child Safety, PsySSA Press, 2012.
[199] N. Shields, K. Nadasen, and L. Pierce, “The effects of community violence on children in Cape
Town, South Africa,” Child Abuse Negl., vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 589–601, May 2008.
[200] G. Super, “Violence and Democracy in Khayelitsha, Governing Crime through
the ???Community???,” Stab. Int. J. Secur. Dev., vol. 4, no. 1, 2015.
[201] L. Buur and S. Jensen, “Introduction: vigilantism and the policing of everyday life in South
Africa,” Afr. Stud., vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 139–152, 2004.
[202] J. P. Misago, “Xenophobic Violence in South Africa: Reflections on Trends, Explanations and
Responses,” presented at the Panel Discussion on Latest Wave of Xenophobic Violence in

56
South Africa, African Centre for Migration Studies, School of Social Sciences, University of the
Witwatersrand, 2015.
[203] L. Freeman and S. Geffen, Kenyatta and Zuma: Presidential discourses during moments of
national violence. 1st South African Homicide Research Colloquium, The River Club, Cape
Town, South Africa, 2015.
[204] P. Naicker, “To be a refugee in South Africa,” Track Two, vol. 9, no. 3, Nov. 2000.
[205] D. Breen and L. Gwyther, “Refugees and other potentially vulnerable groups,” HPCA,
Pinelands, 2009.
[206] UNHCR, “2015 UNHCR Country Operations Profile - South Africa,” UNHCR - The UN Refugee
Agency. [Online]. Available: http://www.unhcr.org/cgi-
bin/texis/vtx/page?page=49e485aa6&submit=GO.
[207] L. Meda, “The mist that they declared to be over is still around: Xenophobic experiences of
refugee children living at a community centre in South Africa,” Child Abuse Res. South Afr. J.,
vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 72–82, 2014.
[208] L. B. Landau, K. Ramjathan-Keogh, and G. Singh, “Xenophobia in South Africa and Problems
Related,” University of the Witwatersrand, 13, 2004.
[209] B. Dodson, “Locating Xenophobia: Debate, Discourse, and Everyday Experience in Cape Town,
South Africa,” Afr. Today, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 2–22, Spring 2010.
[210] P. Commey, “Xenophobia South Africa’s lingering timebomb.,” New Afr., vol. 2013, no. 530,
2013.
[211] D. Mario Matsinhe, “Africa’s Fear of Itself: the ideology of Makwerekwere in South Africa,”
Third World Q., vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 295–313, 2011.
[212] G. Friebel, J. Gallego, and M. Mendola, “Xenophobic attacks, migration intentions, and
networks: evidence from the South of Africa.,” J. Popul. Econ., vol. 26, no. 2, 2013.
[213] K. Von Holdt, A. Kirsten, Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation, University of the
Witwatersrand, and W. and D. I. Society, The smoke that calls: insurgent citizenship, collective
violence and the struggle for a place in the new South Africa : eight case studies of community
protest and xenophobic violence. Johannesburg, South Africa: Centre for the Study of Violence
and Reconciliation : Society, Work and Development Institute, 2011.
[214] P. O’Halloran, “Grahamstown: Police action conceals their failure of the community | Daily
Maverick,” 21-Oct-2015. [Online]. Available:
http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opinionista/2015-10-21-grahamstown-police-action-
conceals-their-failure-of-the-community/#.VsxeNubaDhN. [Accessed: 23-Feb-2016].
[215] X. Koyana, “Hundreds displaced by xenophobic violence in Grahamstown.” [Online].
Available: http://ewn.co.za/2015/10/27/Hundreds-displaced-by-xenophobic-violence-in-
Grahamstown. [Accessed: 23-Feb-2016].
[216] C. Mba, “Grahamstown: The anatomy of xenophobic violence | Daily Maverick,” 05-Nov-
2015. [Online]. Available: http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2015-11-05-grahamstown-
the-anatomy-of-xenophobic-
violence/?utm_source=Daily+Maverick+Mailer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=First+T
hing+with+John+stupart%3A+Tuesday%2C+2+September+2014&utm_term=http%3A%2F%2F
www.dailymaverick.co.za%2Farticle%2F2015-11-05-grahamstown-the-anatomy-of-
xenophobic-violence%2F#.Vsxc-ObaDhN. [Accessed: 23-Feb-2016].
[217] L. Landau, “Why The Deadly Attacks Against Foreigners In South Africa Come As No Surprise,”
The WorldPost, 26-Apr-2015.
[218] P. Shumba, “Xenophobia resurfaces in South Africa,” The Chronicle, 24-Oct-2015.
[219] I. Saleh, “Is it really xenophobia in South Africa or an intentional act of prejudice?,”
Glomedafrica Glob. Media J. - Afr. Ed., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 298–313, 2015.
[220] J. Hayem, “From May 2008 to 2011: Xenophobic Violence and National Subjectivity in South
Africa,” J. South. Afr. Stud., vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 77–97, 2013.

57
[221] L. Lancaster, “ISS Africa | Desperate and divided: South Africa has had enough,” ISS Africa.
[Online]. Available: https://www.issafrica.org/crimehub/news/desperate-and-divided-south-
africa-has-had-enough. [Accessed: 25-Feb-2016].
[222] L. Lancaster, “ISS Africa | Getting to the bottom of what really drives public violence in South
Africa,” ISS Africa, 07-Feb-2014. [Online]. Available: https://www.issafrica.org/iss-
today/getting-to-the-bottom-of-what-really-drives-public-violence-in-south-africa. [Accessed:
01-Mar-2016].
[223] M. Sekhonyane and J. Dugard, “A Violent Legacy: The taxi industry and government at
loggerheads,” SA Crime Q., vol. 10, Dec. 2004.
[224] M. Sekhonyane, “Taxi violence: The regulation and enforcement route,” Nedbank ISS Crime
Index, vol. 5, no. 4, 2001.
[225] S. Bott, A. Morrison, and M. Ellsberg, “Preventing and Responding to Gender-Based Violence
in Middle and Low-Income Countries: A Global Review and Analysis,” World Bank, 3618, Jun.
2005.
[226] J. Meyer, “Perspectives on sexual violence prevention.” 22-Nov-2000.
[227] Western Cape Government, “Violence Prevention through Urban Upgrading Project,” City of
Cape Town, 2014. .
[228] T. Cassidy, M. Ntshingwa, J. Galuszka, and R. Matzopoulos, “Evaluation of a Cape Town Safety
Intervention as a Model for Good Practice: A Partnership between Researchers, Community
and Implementing Agency,” Stab. Int. J. Secur. Dev., vol. 4, no. 1, 2015.
[229] B.-L. Mercy, “Enhancing Safety through Upgrading – Experiences from Cape Town,” African
Centre for Cities, Jan. 2015.
[230] The Global Coalition on Women and AIDS, “Issue brief: Stopping violence against women and
girls for effective HIV responses,” The Global Coalition on Women and AIDS, Geneva, 2011.
[231] Raising Voices, “SASA!,” Raising Voices, 2013. [Online]. Available:
http://raisingvoices.org/SASA.
[232] T. Abramsky, K. Devries, L. Kiss, J. Nakuti, N. Kyegombe, E. Starmann, B. Cundill, L. Francisco,
D. Kaye, T. Musuya, L. Michau, and C. Watts, “Findings from the SASA! study: A cluster
randomized controlled trial to assess the impact of a community mobilization intervention to
prevent violence against women and reduce HIV risk in Kampala, Uganda.,” BMC Medicine,
Jul. 2014.
[233] S. Usdin, E. Scheepers, S. Goldstein, and G. Japhet, “Achieving social change on gender-based
violence: A report on the impact evaluation of Soul City’s fourth series,” Soc. Sci. Med., vol.
61, pp. 2434 – 2445, 2005.
[234] C. J. Colvin, “Report on the Impact of Sonke Gender Justice Network’s ‘One Man Can’
Campaign in the Limpopo, Eastern Cape and Kwa-Zulu Natal Provinces, South Africa,” Sonke
Gender Justice Network.
[235] Jewkes RK, Dunkle K, Nduna M, and Shai N, “Intimate partner violence, relationship power
inequity, and incidence of HIV infection in young women in South Africa: a cohort study.,”
Lancet Lond. Engl., vol. 376, no. 9734, pp. 41–8, 2010.
[236] Gender & Health Research Unit, Medical Research Council, “Stepping Stones,” SAMRC.
[Online]. Available: http://www.mrc.ac.za/gender/stepping.htm.
[237] R. Jewkes, M. Nduna, J. Levin, N. Jama, K. Dunkle, A. Puren, and N. Duvvury, “Impact of
stepping stones on incidence of HIV and HSV-2 and sexual behaviour in rural South Africa:
Cluster randomised controlled trial,” BMJ, vol. 337, 2008.
[238] P. M. Pronyk, J. C. Kim, T. Abramsky, G. Phetla, J. R. Hargreaves, L. A. Morison, C. Watts, J.
Busza, and J. D. Porter, “A combined microfinance and training intervention can reduce HIV
risk behaviour in young female participants,” AIDS, vol. 22, no. 13, pp. 1659–1665, 2008.
[239] J. C. Kim, C. H. Watts, J. R. Hargreaves, L. X. Ndhlovu, G. Phetla, L. A. Morison, J. Busza, J. D.
Porter, and P. Pronyk, “Understanding the impact of a microfinance-based intervention on

58
women’s empowerment and the reduction of intimate partner violence in South Africa,” J.
Inf., vol. 97, no. 10, 2007.
[240] P. M. Pronyk, J. R. Hargreaves, J. C. Kim, L. A. Morison, G. Phetla, C. Watts, J. Busza, and J. D.
H. Porter, “Effect of a structural intervention for the prevention of intimate-partner violence
and HIV in rural South Africa: A cluster randomised trial,” The Lancet, vol. 368, no. 9551, pp.
1973–1983, Dec. 2006.
[241] Gender & Health Research Unit, Medical Research Council, “Respect 4 U,” SAMRC. [Online].
Available: http://www.mrc.ac.za/gender/respect4u.htm.
[242] A. Gevers and A. J. Flisher, “School-based violence prevention interventions,” in C. Ward, A.
van der Merwe, & A. Dawes (Eds.), Youth violence: Sources and solutions in South Africa, Cape
Town, South Africa: UCT Press, pp. 175–212.
[243] D. Olweus and S. P. Limber, “The Olweus Bullying Prevention Program: Implementation and
Evaluation over Two Decades.”
[244] D. P. Farrington and M. M. Ttofi, “School-based programs to reduce bullying and
victimization,” Campbell Syst. Rev., vol. 5, no. 6, 2009.
[245] S. Bollen, L. Artz, L. Vetten, and A. Louw, “Violence against women in metropolitan South
Africa: a study on impact and service delivery,” Institute for Security Studies, Monograph 41,
Sep. 1999.
[246] K. Doolan, “The missing piece in the puzzle. The health sector’s role in implementing the DVA
in SA,” Crime Q., vol. 12, pp. 9–12, 2005.
[247] A. Boyle, S. Robinson, and P. Atkinson, “Domestic violence in emergency medicine patients,”
Emerg. Med. J., vol. 21, pp. 9–13, 2004.
[248] K. Joyner, “Health care for intimate partner violence: Current standard of care and
development of protocol management,” PhD Thesis, University of Stellenbosch, 2009.
[249] M. Tomlinson, A. Dawes, and A. J. Flisher, “Preventing the Development of Youth Violence in
the Early Years - Implications for South African Practice,” in Ward C, Van der Merwe A, &
Dawes A (Eds.), Youth Violence: Sources and Solutions in South Africa, Cape Town: UCT Press,
2012, pp. 141–174.
[250] P. Martin, L. Berry, L. Biersteker, C. Desmond, D. Harrison, S. Naicker, L. Richter, H. Saloojee,
and W. Slemming, “Early Childhood Development: National ECD Policy,” Human Sciences
Research Council, Mar. 2014.
[251] Office of Sexual Assault Prevention & Response, “What is bystander intervention?,” Harvard
University, Mar. 2015.
[252] V. L. Banyard, “Measurement and correlates of prosocial bystander behavior: the case of
interpersonal violence.(Author abstract)(Report),” Violence Vict., vol. 23, no. 1, 2008.
[253] M. Flood, “Changing men: Best practice in violence prevention work with men,” presented at
the Home Truths Conference: Stop Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence: A National
Challenge, Melbourne, 15-Sep-2004.
[254] European Parliament Policy Department, Overview of the worldwide best practices for rape
prevention and for assisting women victims of rape. Geneva, Switzerland: Directorate General
for Internal Policies, 2013.
[255] L. Vetten, “‘It sucks/It’s a wonderful service’: Post-rape care and the micro-politics of
institutions.,” Shukumisa Campaign and ActionAid South Africa, Johannesburg, 2015.
[256] UNICEF South Africa, “Thuthuzela Care Centres,” UNICEF South Africa. [Online]. Available:
http://www.unicef.org/southafrica/hiv_aids_998.html.
[257] UN Women, “Progress of the World’s Women 2011 – 2012: In Pursuit of Justice,” 2011.
[258] S. Quast, “Justice reform and gender,” in Gender and Security Sector Reform Toolkit, Bastick,
M. and Valasek, K., Geneva: DCAF, OSCE/ODIHR and UN-INSTRAW, 2008.
[259] Shukumisa Campaign, “Submission to the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional
Development on the Strategic Plans and Budget of the Department of Justice and
Constitutional Development and the National Prosecuting Authority,” Apr. 2013.

59
[260] D. Smythe, “OPINION: Rape in SA - Why the system is failing women,” EWN: The
Conversation, 2016.
[261] R.W. Connell, and J.W. Messerschmidt. "Hegemonic masculinity rethinking the concept",
Gender & Society, vol. 19, no. 6, 2005, pp. 829-859.
[262] G.W. Walker, "Disciplining protest masculinity," Men and Masculinities, vol. 9, no.1, 2006, pp.
5-22.