OPINION: There has been much talk around the proposed new trespassing laws that have recently been published for public input and debate, writes Lance Fredericks
HAVE you ever had that experience when alarm bells go off in your head, a chill runs down your spine and gooseflesh runs up the other way?
You know the feeling, when you hear something alarming, scary, even downright terrifying!
Well, I had that experience not too long ago when a friend told me about South Africa’s proposed new trespass law. From what I gathered, our judicial system had finally lost their collective minds.
According to what I heard, and by the way, these things I am sharing now were confirmed to me by quite a few people with whom I spoke … if property owners did not make 110 percent sure that they informed potential intruders to stay away, the trespasser had every right to enter a premises.
Yes, I know that “110 percent” is hyperbole, because 100 is the highest you can go mathematically, but bear with me.
Anyway, I ‘learned’ that you had to have clear signage around your home indicating that it was private property and that intruders, trespassers, burglars, robbers, thieves and home invaders were not welcome. Failing that, you had no right to accost an intruder, but had to call the police … yes, your only recourse was informing the intruders that they were trespassing and calling the police if you felt threatened.
I pictured THAT phone call in my mind.
Homeowner: “Hello, police? I’d like to report an intruder on my property!”
Policeman: “Good day ma’am … are you sure it’s an intruder. It isn’t perhaps your husband?”
Homeowner: “No! It’s not my husband! It’s a man that jumped over the wall and he’s going around the house trying to get in!”
Policeman: “Your son perhaps? Maybe he left his key at home?”
Homeowner: “NO!! It’s not my husband nor my son! It’s a stranger that is trying to get into my house and I am alone!”
Policeman: “Ah … I understand. Did you invite him in?”
Homeowner: “Are you serious?”
Policeman: “Well, ma’am, you have to understand that according to the new law – I have the manual in front of me on my desk – if you don’t have a sign prohibiting entry to strangers, then you may as well have invited him.”
Homeowner: “Yes! I do have signs. I know the law. Just send a patrol car now! I am scared!”
Policeman: “Is the intruder short or tall?”
Homeowner: “Huh?”
Policeman: “You see I have to make sure that the sign was at eye-level for him … he may have missed it, you understand.”
Homeowner: “It’s a sign! It’s at normal height! He SAW it! It says ‘No Trespassing’! He just ignored it!”
Policeman: “You mean it’s only in English? What if the gentleman cannot read English? You do know that there’s almost a dozen more official languages you should have added … you really should be more considerate.”
Homeowner: “Oh, wait … never mind. Don’t bother sending a patrol car. I found the keys to the safe where my husband keeps his hunting rifle.”
Policeman: “Madame … we’ll be there in two minutes!”
I have to add that I shared the rumours, expressed my disgust and got caught up in the frenzy of slamming a judiciary that had finally gone off the deep end.
I then rolled up my sleeves, flexed my typing fingers, dipped my pen into my special poison ink and prepared to write a scathing column; one that would finally put those ‘idiots’ in their place and secure me a journalism award.
Sigh, I was so disappointed when I started digging …
As it turns out, the entire hysteria came about as a result of a Tik Tok video that went viral a few weeks ago. You see, the proposed new trespass law was put out there for public scrutiny and input, and there are a few points that were apparently misinterpreted by the person who created the viral video.
These are, firstly, that “property owners need to give notice – either by putting up clear signage or giving an oral warning to the perpetrator – that indicates that entry is prohibited.”
Secondly, “Owners or lawful occupiers can call the police to apprehend trespassers”.
And finally that “Trespassers can defend against the charge if there is a reasonable belief that they have title or interest on the premises that entitles them to enter the property”.
Sounds rather alarming, doesn’t it? However, the requirement that land should be appropriately fenced and there should be proper signage stating that it is private property, according to Ministry of Justice spokesperson Chrispin Phiri, is specifically for vacant land … and not regular homes.”
Phiri, in an interview on Talk 702, also explained that there was a difference between trespassing and burglary or housebreaking.
“You would be entitled to defend yourself when someone intrudes your home because that intrusion is actually a common law crime which we often know as burglary or forced entry,” said Phiri. “That is not permissible at all, and you would be entitled to protect that piece of property, or home in particular,” he added.
I shook my head, rolled down my sleeves and carefully drained the poison from my pen.
“How, oh how am I going to ‘unspread’ the rumours that I have been spreading for over a week?” I wondered to myself. It is so easy to get caught up in feverishness, especially when people around you are excited and emotional and you join them in mercilessly flogging the scapegoat.
But, when the dust settles and you realise that there is no way to unsay the harsh things you have been spewing with your face all red and the veins in your head bulging, it’s then that you will remember a quote like the one by Ambrose Bierce.
He writes: “Speak when you are angry and you will make the best speech you will ever regret.”
