SOUTH African Police Service (SAPS) national head office has agreed to revise a controversial operational circular that set out how police officials should respond when private organisers or community members demand their assistance to identify and remove foreign nationals.
This after the SA First Forum (SAFF) threatened legal action and instructed attorneys Zuma and Partners Incorporated to send a letter of demand.
But the SAPS response does not go as far as SAFF’s public characterisation of it.
In a letter dated 12 August 2026 addressed to the Divisional Commissioner, Zuma and Partners acting for SAFF recorded that SAPS had, on or about 20 July 2026, issued a circular referenced 3/1/5 titled “Operational Policy: Demands for Members of the South African Police Service to Accompany Private Organisers and/or Members of the Community to Target Foreign Nationals.”
The firm quoted the circular’s directive to SAPS members and indicated the organisation’s intention to challenge it.
The original circular, portions of which were also provided, states its purpose is “to provide clear policy and operational guidance to all members” following “recent incidents in various areas where private organisers and or communities have demanded that members of SAPS accompany them to identify and remove foreign nationals.”
It goes on to state that “private organisers and individuals have no legal authority to identify, detain or remove any person on the basis that they believe they are legal or illegal foreigners,” and that SAPS involvement in “any unlawful intervention to force foreign nationals… to close businesses and vacate communities” would expose the Service to “legal suits, reputational damages and/or human rights risks.”
Citing the Immigration Act (13 of 2002) and the Border Management Authority Act (2 of 2020), the circular confirms that verifying, detaining or deporting undocumented foreign nationals falls under the Department of Home Affairs and the Border Management Authority not private citizens, and not SAPS acting on private instruction.
Crucially, the document does not instruct police to stand down from policing generally.
It sets out a defined supporting role for SAPS in immigration-related matters, including verifying identities where there is a lawful basis to do so, referring suspected immigration violations to Home Affairs or the BMA, effecting arrests where authorised by law, providing security during enforcement operations, maintaining public order, and investigating related crimes such as human trafficking and fraudulent documentation.
In its reply dated 21 August 2026, signed by Lieutenant General MJ Mamotheti, SAPS said the circular’s proposals had been noted and clarified that the circular was addressed to police officials to guide their own conduct not to define the rights of private persons.
The response reaffirmed that officials are required under section 13(3)(a) of the South African Police Service Act (68 of 1995) to perform their duties “with due regard to his or her powers, duties and functions, in a manner that is reasonable in the circumstances.”
SAPS confirmed it “has undertaken a process to revise the circular to clarify issues addressed in the original circular,” and that a revised circular titled “Operational Guidelines: Requests for members of the South African Police Service to accompany private organisers and/or Members of the community to deal with foreign nationals” will be issued to replace the original, to promote effective policing and to ensure the lawful and constructive execution of the objects of the SAPS as set out in section 205(3) of the Constitution.
Announcing the development on social media, the founder and leader of March and March Jacinta Zinhle Mangobese-Zuma took to social media and wrote : “A few weeks ago I shared with the public that the SAPS has issued a circular to the police basically instructing them not to police in instances where there are foreigners and the community involved… This morning we received a response from the SAPS saying that they are revising the circular. The police will be policed.”
That framing is not fully borne out by the documents.
SAPS’s letter does not concede that the original circular told police “not to police.”
Its response and the circular itself expressly preserve a supporting role for SAPS in immigration enforcement.
It also draws a firm line against police being deployed at the direction of private organisers community against foreign nationals, which the circular warns carries legal and constitutional risk for the Service.
SAPS says it had already undertaken the revision process, and its letter reads as an internal clarification exercise rather than a concession that the circular was unlawful or that police had been wrongly told to disengage.
Whether the promised revised circular narrows, restates, or expands SAPS’s role remains to be seen.
SAPS has not yet published the replacement document.
