Hundreds of qualified electricians across South Africa have done everything required of them. We studied, passed our exams, built our experience and applied to the Department of Labour (DoL) for our wireman's licence. Then we waited. Many of us have been waiting for months, with no registration number, no confirmation letter and no clear answers. On top of that, the DoL has now told applicants that card printing has stopped because the printing machine is faulty. These delays started long before the machine broke down. Without the licence, a qualified electrician cannot legally issue a Certificate of Compliance or register as a contractor. That means turning down work, losing clients and watching our businesses stall while bills, rent and school fees keep coming. We are not asking for favours. We are asking for the right to work, to earn and to provide for our families, and for the dignity of being recognised for qualifications we have already earned.

“We are actually the working poor. We cannot meet our basic needs, and we struggle to support our unemployed family members and also send money to our relatives in rural areas. The average cost of a basic food basket of groceries is R 5 530 per month as of July 2026. Earning R5 530.52 per month means that we cannot afford to pay for transport, rent, water, electricity, clothing, education, data, health care, entertainment, and bereavement. We pay so much for transport and electricity that we don’t have money for food. Yet Festive bosses are making millions. Recently, Festive/Astral paid R342 million to the shareholders. The CEO of Festive/Astral earned R27.9 million in one year. It will take a Festive Worker about 415 years to earn what the Festive CEO earned in one year.” A call to communities and the public! Thousands of workers at Festive (part of Astral Foods) call on you to boycott Festive chicken products in solidarity.  https://groundup.org.za/article/hundreds-of-festive-chicken-workers-down-tools/ 

  After 27 years of caring for children, Mama Sweetness Marubelela found herself in a criminal dock. She is one of three Orange Farm ECD practitioners facing charges for operating without municipal health permits. Her lawyers explained that she needs a municipal lease to apply, but the City has not provided it. She is being prosecuted while the municipality controls the document she needs. This is a systemic problem. Sisonke ECD Forum reports that approximately 200 of its 265 principals struggle to obtain health permits. Missing documents, costly building plans and municipal fees prevent centres from complying. Fines take money away from food, salaries and improvements, while closures risk leaving children without care and parents unable to work. Children deserve safe, quality ECD services. Municipalities must uphold safety standards while helping practitioners meet them. A fine cannot produce a missing lease or resolve an unaffordable approval process. Sign and share this petition to demand action from The City of Johannesburg  Metropolitan Municipality. Together, we can push Johannesburg to resolve outstanding leases, remove registration barriers and support practitioners. #Bana Pele #MakeLocalGovernmentWorkForECD!

People, especially children, in low-income communities deserve to have access to a library. Our literacy rate is declining, and the neglect of our libraries contributes to that. Our children's education has to be prioritised, and having well-functioning third spaces such as libraries is important. 

South Africa is currently dealing with a gambling crisis, which is worsened by the aggressive marketing/advertisements of gambling companies. It is clear that gambling companies are trying to normalise gambling at every level of society – and for every age, even appealing to minors. We have to protect vulnerable children and also hold gambling companies to account, and make it clear that there are lines they should not cross. 

South Africa is facing a silent crisis: a severe ongoing shortage of rape kits at police stations across the country. When a woman or child walk into a police station to report a rape they are frequently turned away because SAPS has a shortage of rape kits availabe to collect evidence of the assault. As we have seen in the last year that there were reports of rape kit shortages in the Western Cape, Mpumalanga, Northern Cape and Kwa Zulu Natal. This means that women who are walking into police stations are turned away because there are no rape kits. For example the Daily Maveric reports a case of a doctors at Thuthuzela Care Centres who requested rape kits from SAPS, and was told there were none. When there are no rape kits, then it means that justice can’t be fully administered.   South Africa is ranked amongst the countries in the world with the highest recorded number of rape cases. Rape is scary in South Africa. There is an average number of 108 reported rapes everyday, and more than 4 every hour[1]. SAPS knows that rape occurs approximately every 12 minitues, yet when procuring rape kits[2], this clarity doesnt seem to match that knowledge. Let’s put this into perspective. SAPS procures Rape Kits through a structured public procurement process managed by its national Supply Chain Management (SCM)[3]. In simple terms, rape kits are procured through national tendering and contracts. I know it automatically raises cause for concern when we hear the word “Tender” in South Africa, but bear with me. In a written reply to a parliamentary question on 12 May 2025, the Minister of Police disclosed that SAPS procured 51,138 adult sexual assault collection kits and 30,330 paediatric kits for the  2022/2023 financial year from ECM Technology[4]. The important thing to note here is that the contract period runs for three years: 2023-2026. This means that the 51, 138 adult kits and 30 330 paediatric kits were meant to service all South African police stations for a period of 3 years, but this does not make sense because our country is facing a rape crisis. As of the 2022/2023 financial year, a total of 43,037 reported rape offenses were committed in South Africa[5]. In the 2023/24 annual crime statistics, there were 42,569 reported cases of rape[6]. Between January and March 2025, 10 688 people were raped, yes, that amounts to116 women and children per day[7]. This means that the combined number of rape kits that were made available over a period of 3 years is 80 000, but  the total rape stats over the same 3 year period is 126 081. How can we reconcile these numbers? How is SAPS procuring rape kits when they have the data? Are they guessing instead of making sure that whenever a survior walks into a police station to report their assault, that there is always a rape kit available.  The official crime statistics may point to an apparent decline in reported rape cases, however this is not reflective of what is going on the ground. There is a decline because SAPS is proessing way less rape cases than the ones reported, becuase of the recurring problem of rape kit shortages. Moreover, even if a woman gets a rape kit, she has to wait more than a year for the rape kit to be processed because of the massive DNA backlog in our labs. Consequently when SAPS closes 957 rape case dockets on a monthly basis due to a supposed “lack of evidence”[8], it is all because of systematic failures within SAPS, and not really a lack of evidence. This is why there is such a miscarriage of justice on every end of processing rape cases within SAPS, because of systemic failures. There is a growing lack of trust and apathy towards the administration of justice of rape cases because the system is broken. That is why is understandable why women would not even bother to report rape. If police stations don’t have rape kits, what’s the point?  We are at a point of crisis. The threat of sexual violence is everywhere;  it is in our homes, at the taxi rank, in the workplace, on the street, and even at the police station. We are not safe! When rape occurs, we need to know that something will actually happen. Rape kits are critical for collecting forensic evidence; without them, vital evidence is lost forever, and the investigation is crippled from the start. We want the Minister of Police to treat the procurement and supply of rape kits as an immediate emergency. Women and children need to be able to trust the South African Police Service, but right now, survivors face huge barriers just trying to report these crimes. The last thing they should encounter is a justice system that lacks the basic tools needed to investigate their cases properly. How many more survivors of rape need to be turned away at police stations? How many more women need to be traumatized by being forced to travel from one police station to the next, hoping against hope that a rape kit is actually available? SAPS cannot keep procuring on an unpredictable, ad-hoc basis. As Fannie Masemola revealed in a 2022 parliamentary monitoring group session, there is currently no official minimum requirement for the number of evidence collection kits that must be available at police stations. This means SAPS leadership is content to let shortages happen while survivors suffer. We must act now. By coming together and signing this petition, you will be saying no to SAPS’S lack of accountability, to the denial of justice for women who are brutally assaulted, to SAPS negligence of women’s pain and apathy towards women’s suffering. Add your signature now to demand a data-driven, accountable procurement system that ensures every single police station has the kits it needs.

Every year, Gauteng parents are told to apply, upload documents, and wait. When the system fails, parents must again chase answers, correct errors, and travel between offices. When placements are delayed, children lose learning time. When schools are too far from home, parents must figure out how to get them there. These are not minor administrative inconveniences. They affect children during crucial years of their education. Ten years into this system, the Department is still leaving parents to clean up its mess. Is this not enough evidence that the Department is not coping? We demand an end to online-only admissions before 2028. Keep and improve the portal, but stop making it the only way to access a public school place. Parents must be able to apply in person, get help with documents and challenge errors without needing a smartphone, data or a printer. The website crashed in 2016. In 2019, 43,797 applicants were reportedly unplaced when the deadline was extended. In 2021, 121,778 applicants were awaiting placement as another deadline was extended. For the 2026 school year, 10,295 learners remained unplaced in December 2025, and 4,858 were still waiting on 6 January 2026. The Department announced the placement of the final 484 learners only in March. [1–4] These are not isolated glitches. After a decade, the Department is still struggling to deliver placements on time. Yet Gauteng Education MEC Lebogang Maile himself presented the 210,055 applications received within the first four hours of the 2027 admissions process as evidence of “the continued confidence that parents and guardians have in the province’s online admissions system” [11]. Confidence? What choice do many parents have when private schooling is unaffordable? Parents are not applying to congratulate the Department. They are trying to secure their children's education. Demand for public schools is not proof that the admissions system works, especially when the Department continues to struggle to place the very children behind those applications. High application numbers prove that families need public education. They do not prove that the system delivering it is working. Digitisation has not resolved longstanding problems with admissions. The old paper system had documented problems with discriminatory admissions and unlawful fees. In 2025, parents reported alleged demands for money for school places, and the Department warned about placement scams. [5–7] Moving admissions online means little if parents cannot clearly understand the criteria used to place their children or challenge decisions they believe are wrong. Internet access and digital literacy cannot be assumed. The Gauteng City-Region Observatory found that 54% of surveyed households had no home internet connection. The Department's walk-in centre locations were reportedly still unpublished days before applications opened in 2025. [8–9] A child's access to education should not depend on a parent's data, digital skills or ability to navigate a website. The disconnect between Grade R and Grade 1 is another sign that admissions have not been properly thought through. A child can attend Grade R at a school that offers Grade 1 and still have no guarantee of staying there. Why is the Department not planning for this very predictable transition? Parents are left to reapply, unnecessarily compete for places, and risk uprooting children from schools where they have settled. Are we prioritising numbers or children's wellbeing? [10] Gauteng parents, add your voice.  Sign and share this petition. Tell us about application errors, delayed placements, schools far from home, or demands for money, and identify the district involved. We are not asking Gauteng to abandon technology. We are asking why, after ten years, parents are still expected to work around a system that is supposed to serve them. The Department must stop treating recurring failures as isolated problems and prove that it can deliver accessible, accountable admissions before 2028. A school place is a right, not a lottery. End online-only admissions before 2028. Sources 1. Website crash, April 2016 TechCentral — Gauteng schools admissions website collapses 2. Placement delays in 2019 and 2021 SAnews — GDE admission placement period extended, 2019 The Citizen — GDE extends placement period for Grades 1 and 8, 30 November 2021 3. Unplaced learners during the 2026 admissions cycle Daily Maverick — Gauteng's 2026 school admissions crisis, December 2025 SAnews — Over 4,000 Grade 1 and Grade 8 learners still to be placed, 7 January 2026 4. Final placements announced in March 2026 South African Government — MEC Matome Chiloane on complete placement of remaining Grade 1 and Grade 8 learners 5. Historical admissions discrimination and unlawful fees University of Pretoria — Stifling transformation through the manipulation of enrolment: A case study of two public high schools in Gauteng Province OECD Observatory of Public Sector Innovation — Gauteng Department of Education Online Admissions Application System 6. Reports of alleged payments for placements, January 2025 SABC News — Frustration as learner placement delays continue in Gauteng 7. Department warning about placement fraud, November 2025 South African Government — Gauteng Education warns parents against fraudsters offering placements 8. Internet access in Gauteng Gauteng City-Region Observatory — Digital divide in Gauteng 9. Walk-in centre information, July 2025 IOL — Parents left in limbo as GDE fails to disclose walk-in centres for online school registration 10. Admissions rules and Grade R-to-Grade 1 continuity Gauteng Department of Education — Admissions FAQs Department of Basic Education — Guidelines for implementing certain amendments to the South African Schools Act, June 2025 11. Maile's statement about parental confidence, 5 August 2026 News24 — Gauteng education department receives 210,000 applications for 2027 admission

Civilian firearm possession is not a right but a privilege that should be subject to stricter laws that ensure safety for all South Africans !  The Firearms Control Amendment Bill [1] was published in the Government Gazette on the 21st May 2021. Public submissions were initially open until July 2021 but then extended to 4th August 2021, which accumulated over 118,000 formal public comments. Following an overwhelming public outcry regarding proposals to remove "self-defence" as a valid reason for owning a firearm, the Portfolio Committee on Police officially postponed the bill in November 2021. The bill was sent back to the Civilian Secretariat for Police Service for further stakeholder engagement rather than being permanently struck down in Parliament.  Research shows that there are more reasons that support policy makers’ decision to make self defence an insufficient reason to own a firearm, reasons that triumph over the ones put forward by opposers of the bill. Pro-control advocates frequently challenge the notion that carrying a firearm offers net safety benefits, citing peer-reviewed health and criminology studies which show that victims carrying firearms face higher risks of violent victimization and death than unarmed individuals because the presence of a weapon escalates violent encounters and statistical analysis indicates that  a civilian is significantly more likely to have their firearm stolen during a violent confrontation than to use it successfully to stop an attack. When a firearm enters a home under the promise of protection, it often becomes an instrument of domestic terror [4]. South African studies consistently prove that the majority of women killed in domestic contexts are murdered by an intimate partner using a legally owned firearm, so removing self-defense as a valid ground for licensing is not an abstract policy change, it is a life-saving intervention that directly lowers domestic homicides and protects families across our nation. The concerns raised by opponents come from a very real place of fear, and that shouldn't be ignored, but looking at South Africa’s painful crisis of violence today, the evidence is clear; removing self-defense as a standalone reason for gun ownership is about saving lives, and when we weigh the arguments, the human cost makes prioritising safety and life the only responsible path forward.  Every gun stolen in a burglary or lost to corruption isn’t just a statistic, it becomes a weapon used to terrorize our families, our women, and our communities, research from organizations like Gun Free South Africa and the Global Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime reveals a sobering truth; legal civilian guns are one of the primary sources feeding illegal weapons onto our streets. By ending private firearm possession for self-defense, we can close this pipeline, choke off the supply of guns to violent criminals, and take a necessary step toward keeping our loved ones safe.  We all deserve to live in a nation where our right to life comes before the prevalence of dangerous weapons. Under our Constitution, gun ownership is a privilege that should always be subject to the law for the safety of all South Africans. Internationally, some countries recognise that allowing unrestricted firearm access under the banner of self-defense only fuels the cycle of violence, so by standing together and aligning our laws with international standards, we can prioritise peace, uphold our Constitution, and safeguard our collective right to live free from fear.  Behind every illegal gun on our streets is a story that often starts in a legal home [3]. Studies show that thousands of civilian firearms are stolen in South Africa every year, turning everyday household break-ins into direct supply lines for violent gang syndicates and armed criminals. When we buy guns for self-defense, we inadvertently build a massive inventory that routinely falls into the hands of those who terrorize our communities. What was bought to protect a family far too often ends up taking someone else’s child. A minority of 118,000 people [2] cannot decide the future of safety for every South African family. Clear research shows that more guns in our neighborhoods lead to more tragedy, while decisive firearm control saves lives [5]. Signing this petition means joining South Africans from all walks of life to reclaim our right to safety in our homes, our communities, and our nation. Sources  [1] The Firearms Control Amendment Bill [2] Dear South Africa [3] HOW TO SILENCE THE GUNS? : Southern Africa’s illegal firearms markets [4]Disarming the dispirited South African: A critical analysis of the proposed ban on firearms for self-defence  [5] Firearms Control Briefing Gun control, self-defence and public safety

Navitas Petroleum must not be allowed to export energy resources from South Africa to feed the corporate machinery of Israel’s genocide, ecocide, illegal occupation and apartheid. No profit can justify permanent ecological damage to our oceans and the livelihoods of our coastal communities.  In September 2026, South Africa granted offshore fossil fuel rights to an Israeli company, Navitas Petroleum. This is not an ordinary commercial transaction. This deal enables Apartheid Israel to benefit materially from activities within South Africa’s jurisdiction and territory that will cause irreversible harm to peoples, climate and nature.  Navitas Petroleum generates income for Apartheid Israel, Israeli investors and financial institutions. The exploration right relates to Block 1 CBK, which is situated within an ecologically and economically significant marine region in the Orange Basin on South Africa’s west coast, along its maritime border with Namibia. Any exploration or extraction would have devastating impacts on marine ecosystems, fisheries, coastal communities and livelihoods in both countries, and for climate-vulnerable communities globally.  Under international and domestic law, and as enshrined in its Constitution, South Africa has iron-clad obligations to ensure human rights and the protection of the environment, including the climate and marine systems. These obligations must be reflected in any decisions on national resources. National resources should not be in the hands of corporate actors whose material operations benefit regimes accused of crimes against humanity.  In allowing an Israeli company to profit from South Africa’s fossil fuel resources, South Africa is directly undermining its international and domestic legal obligations and moral standing on Palestinian liberation, human rights and environmental justice. South Africa’s legal and moral obligations to Palestine South Africa has a longstanding and principled stance that supports Palestinian liberation. South Africa has stated that normal relations cannot continue while Israel commits genocide and war crimes, removes Palestinians from their lands and perpetrates violations of  international law. These human rights violations are documented in detail in United Nations reports.  The International Court of Justice (ICJ) Advisory Opinion on Legal Consequences arising from the Policies and Practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem concluded in 2024 that Israel’s continued presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory is unlawful, and that all States are obliged to recognise unlawful occupation, and not to render aid or assistance in maintaining it.  South Africa is leading proceedings against Israel before the ICJ under the Genocide Convention. State Parties  to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide are bound to prevent genocide and refrain from complicity. Where a serious risk is known or ought reasonably to be known, States must exercise due diligence as well as exercise their capacity to influence and regulate private actors – including  leveraging their economic ties.  South Africa’s obligations to peoples and nature Under several human rights, climate and environmental treaties and agreements, South Africa is obligated to reduce and prevent transboundary and intergenerational environmental harm, including harm to the climate. In Sustaining the Wild Coast, the South African Constitutional Court reaffirmed the State’s obligation to protect the environment for present and future generations. The Court emphasised that financial and commercial interests cannot be placed above the rights of affected peoples. The Court also recognised the 2025 ICJ Advisory Opinion on Obligations of States in Respect of Climate Change, which determined that States are obligated to prevent significant environmental harm, to act with due diligence in accordance with the latest science, and to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause harm to the environment, including the climate system.  Why a thorough public participation process is necessary South Africa’s mineral and petroleum resources are administered by the State as custodian for the benefit of the nation. South African law recognises public participation as integral for decisions on fossil fuel exploration (PAJA, NEMA, and MPRDA).  In Sustaining the Wild Coast, the South African Constitutional Court emphasised the importance of adequate consultation to ensure that the concerns of affected peoples such as fisherfolk are considered, and that their agency and dignity is protected. Access to information is a key element of the right to public participation. Interested and affected parties must be properly informed and be able to participate in decision making. No information regarding this transfer has so far been made available from the South African government, as of mid October 2026.  Objection to the transfer of rights to Navitas In August 2026, human rights and environmental organisations wrote to Minister Mantashe and the Petroleum Agency of South Africa (PASA), advising that the transfer of rights to Navitas Petroleum should be denied. No response or acknowledgement was received. On 22 September 2026, it was made public by the companies involved that the rights had been granted. An application for critical information was submitted to PASA on 24 September 2026 under the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA). As yet, no response has been received.  South Africa must end its complicity in Apartheid Israel’s war crimes and crimes against humanity - not form new long term commercial relationships that will be devastating for people and the planet.  Minister Mantashe must act urgently on civil society demands to stop Navitas Petroleum operating in South African waters.  Please email us for more information.  For more information and context, please watch this webinar:  Oil, Occupation & Extractivism - Why South Africa must repeal offshore oil and gas rights granted to Navitas.

Social grant money is no longer enough to buy food, pay for electricity, pay taxi fare, and other expenses. Ramaphosa needs to top up all social grants soon because this is a crisis. In 2020, Ramaphosa increased all social grants and even introduced a R350 SRD grant in response to the COVID-19 crisis; he can top up all grants again now. We keep reducing the quality and quantity of food we buy simply because everything keeps going up in price. The gap between social grants and the cost of living keeps getting bigger [1]; we need help. The cost of living is higher than ever and the government is under pressure to act. President Cyril Ramaphosa topped up all social grants in 2020 to help people, he can do it again now. Let's keep showing them that the current cost of living is a crisis in itself; they may see the need to increase all social grants. We managed to get political parties to commit to increasing social grants; we can get them to act on it. Do you mind telling Ramaphosa and the Minister of Finance to top up all social grants? In the past, amandla.mobi campaigns helped force the government to extend and increase the SRD grant and top up child and old age grants. Government failures have forced us to pay higher prices for electricity and water. Combined with high fuel and food prices, many of us are at a breaking point. Social grant amounts must keep up with the cost of living. Ramaphosa must act because the government can afford top-ups. It doesn’t matter which political party you support, or whether you vote or not; we, the people, must make our democracy work for us by making our voices heard. We want social grants top-ups to tackle the cost of living.  References: [1] Social grants not keeping up with the high cost of living, Newzroom Afrika, YouTube. 13 September 2026.

The public looks to health professionals and practitioners to act in the public interest. What message does it send to the public when we give food businesses a platform to legitimize and promote ultra-processed foods at a nutrition congress?  The Nutrition Congress is supposed to be an event that brings together nutrition experts across South Africa and beyond to present research and discuss practical solutions to global health challenges. We cannot allow businesses that contribute to these health challenges to  sponsor the event. In South Africa alone, 79 people die daily due to diet-related NCDs. For most of these people, this is due to what they eat and drink. Nutrition Society of South Africa (NSSA) and The Association for Dietetics in South Africa (ADSA) cannot convene to combat such issues with an industry that continues to contribute heavily to these health issues.  We applaud the National Department of Health speakers and representatives, and other conference participants for speaking out against the presence of the ultra-processed food industry. We wholeheartedly agree, their presence is a major conflict of interest.

The violent reality that has unfortunately become all too familiar has once again struck our country. In Ekurhuleni, nine women have been found dead since July, with the seventh and eighth victims discovered naked and in advanced states of decomposition along roadsides and open fields [1]. A woman’s body was lying decaying in a field before law enforcement even realised that she was missing. This is a horrific reflection of the complete lack of urgency that our protective mechanisms hold when it comes to women.  The government’s response has once again exposed a fatal flaw in our policing model as it is entirely reactive. Police leadership waited until four women were murdered in the same area before assembling a high-level task force, and only began cross-referencing station records after the body count continued to rise [1]. We are exhausted by a broken system that treats post-mortem arrests as a victory while doing nothing to keep women alive in the first place. Empty political sympathy and calls for action do not save lives. We do not want justice that only arrives in a mortuary. We need proactive, preemptive measures that identify serial predators and prevent deaths before they occur. This reactive model is driven by severe underfunding of GBVF response. While GBVF was officially declared a national crisis, the state continues to cut overall spending on policing, leaving frontline officers stripped of basic resources [2]. The government's true priorities are clear in the numbers. Last year, R339 million was found for VIP services to protect just 3 666 politicians while this year only R43 million was allocated to the national body meant to coordinate South Africa’s response to gender-based violence and femicide, despite a staggering 50 511 reported GBVF cases [2]. Even when temporary task teams are formed during public outrage, once they are dissolved local police stations are left isolated and serial predators are free to strike again. Our specific demands are non-negotiable and urgently necessary. The blueprint to stop serial offenders before they strike again already exists in the SAPS Policy on the Investigation and Management of Serial Rape and Serial Murder [4] and is backed by a 2026 study on serial crime linkage in Ekurhuleni [5]. But without ring-fenced funding, these frameworks remain empty promises on paper. We are mourning both the sisters we have lost and the lives we are told we cannot live, at least not without fear or the terrifying question of Am I next? If thousands of us join our voices today, we can build the public pressure required to force Treasury and SAPS leadership to move from reactive lip service to permanent, preventative action. Sign this petition now to demand permanent emergency funding for a serial crime rapid-response task force. It’s time that one more turns into no more. References: [1] IOL News: Ninth body found in Dawn Park, Ekurhuleni (https://iol.co.za/news/south-africa/gauteng/2026-09-17-breaking-ninth-body-found-in-dawn-park-ekurhuleni/) [2] Alternative Information & Development Centre (AIDC): Years of Underfunding Have Undermined SA’s Fight Against GBVF (https://aidc.org.za/years-of-underfunding-have-undermined-sas-fight-against-gbvf/) [3] National Treasury / South African Government: Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) Section 16 Emergency Expenditure Provisions (https://www.treasury.gov.za/legislation/pfma/act.pdf) [4] Civilian Secretariat for Police Service: SAPS Policy on the Investigation and Management of Serial Rape and Serial Murder (https://www.policesecretariat.gov.za/sites/default/files/publications/policy_invs_man_rape.pdf) [5] Springer Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology (2026): Serial Crime Linkage and Multidisciplinary Response in Ekurhuleni (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11896-026-09830-5)