Kenya security guard regulation is a good thing
Kenya Sept 5 2018 Kenya’s private security industry is a vast and powerful force. In its foundation, it is police power, with origins older than public policing.
It is a central player in the protection of the citizenry, business and property. The scope and extent of private security going into the future looks endless.
The industry has about 1,000 operating entities offering a diversified range of services. It directly employs more than 500,000 people, with an estimated annual turnover of over Sh300 billion. It is ubiquitous and provides, in many cases, the first line of policing for industry, business and individuals.
Public policing, as embodied largely under the National Police Service, comes under the direct regulation of constitutional principles, various laws and regulations, executive edict, several commissions and a well-defined command structure.
Private security on the other hand is a fragmented force and has largely been self-regulating, with every entity having its own guidelines and accountable mainly to shareholders and a level of public interest.
The making of the Private Security Regulation an Act on May 18, 2016 and commencement on June 3, 2016, brought the entire industry under central and public regulation. Under this Act the Private Security Regulatory Authority was created with the board being appointed last year and a CEO moving in recently. The Authority is expected to implement the law
The Act defines the scope of both the industry and private security providers, lays down the basis of both registration and licensing, the framework for cooperation with national security organs. It defines and brings all security equipment under its regulation, provides a framework for inquiry into the conduct of private security providers and a code of conduct for the industry.
Recently, a leading security company invited tenders through the dailies for supply of security equipment, including firearms, despite the fact that this is still prohibited under the law. This was a clear sign that the industry is unaware of the new legal regime it is now under. Continuing to operate like it is business as usual presents a challenge for the industry, the new regulator and the Government.
These include the Private Security Industry Act 2001 of the UK with its Security Industry Authority as the statutory body charged with regulating the industry, Jamaica’s Private Security Regulation Act of 1992, and South Africa’s Private Security Industry Regulation Act of 2001. For the industry to achieve compliance, a lot of work needs to be done. The regulatory Authority will need the cooperation of the industry, Government and the public to deliver its mandate. The business nature of the industry should provide a motive for expedition of the process as businesses would like this done in the shortest and most affordable way possible. Regulation should be a facilitator rather than a burden for business. The public interest in the industry beyond its mandate is foremost going to be its human resource practices.
Guards have become pervasive, especially in urban environments, working extensive hours for little pay. This is an issue both industry and regulator will have to address. The National Police Service has also involuntarily been pushed into private security, with services such as Cash in Transit. Security of buildings and other private or public places has been handed to the police, yet these are essentially not public policing roles. Deploying up to 10 police officers in a mall as deterrent to crime is not the best use of both the police and the public purse.
Increasingly, these roles should be moved to private industry to release tied up policemen for general public good.
Regulation will certainly offer the opportunity for new processes, create new roles, build new relationships, and see deployment of new tools and technologies, which can be leveraged for more industry efficiency and new business opportunities.
