Genevieve Serra|Published
The City of Cape Town is facing questions over the funding and effectiveness of its Ceasefire Project, after a community-based gang intervention initiative said it had assisted more than 400 high-risk young people and reduced violence by 43% in the areas where it operated.
The figures were provided by Pastor Craven Engel, head of the Ceasefire Lite Project, after Deputy Mayor Eddie Andrews was unable to provide data on the programme’s success during a mayoral debate in Cape Town last week.
The project, initially funded by the City for eight years, lost its municipal financial support in 2018 but continues to operate as Ceasefire Lite, providing youth intervention services without City funding.
Gang violence and safety projects under scrutiny
The debate brought together representatives of 11 political parties to discuss some of Cape Town’s most pressing challenges, including the housing crisis, unemployment, gangsterism, homelessness and access to basic municipal services.
The engagement was held with the public and media at the National Media Group’s Cape Town elections town hall at The Capetonian Hotel in the CBD.
Other heated topics included the City’s R114 million N2 Edge Safety Project, also known as the “N2 wall” project, and questions about where the National Coloured Congress (NCC) was when confronting gang leaders and drug dens.
During a panel discussion on gangs and crime interventions, Andrews said the City had offered various programmes, including the Ceasefire Project, which had rehabilitated gangsters and their peers.
“We had the Ceasefire project where we rehabilitated gangsters, rehabilitating their peers in the community, and we continue our partnership with the Chrysalis Academy,” he said.
The Patriotic Alliance’s mayoral candidate, Cheslyn Daniels, asked Andrews whether the City could provide data to support the programme’s success.
Andrews said he could not, adding that Engel had run the programme and would have to research the figures.
The Hanover Park-based project was discontinued in 2018 after being run for five years with a budget of R5 million.
It aimed to target high-risk individuals in an attempt to reduce gang violence. The City withdrew, citing budget concerns. A new safety intervention, known as ShotSpotter, was subsequently introduced in communities such as Manenberg and Hanover Park.
In June, the City revealed that ShotSpotter, another multi-million-rand project, had ended and was under review.
The Weekend Argus further probed Andrews about Ceasefire’s funding and the project’s success.
According to the City, a parliamentary question and reply published in 2018 revealed that the Ceasefire team undertook 747 conflict mediations during the 2016/17 period.
It said that, to date, 2,730 high-risk individuals had been assisted with a view to eventually exiting gangs. During the 2016/17 period, approximately 1,090 high-risk individuals were enrolled in various outreach programmes.
Ceasefire continued after municipal funding ended
Engel told Weekend Argus that, despite the funding being withdrawn, Ceasefire continued to operate under the new name Ceasefire Lite. The community-driven project had become a model for universities, crime experts and vulnerable children, he said.
“The Ceasefire project is still active but not with the City; it is managing itself on its own since the city withdrew in 2018. The programme had great success,” he said.
“The programme managed itself from 2013 to 2018, and then the City withdrew their support, and we had to continue it. We cannot bring a gang intervention programme to a high-risk community and then withdraw it, and then you will lose your credibility.
"According to the data we have, the programme helped over 400 high-risk youth, what we call transporters of violence, and that is the guy who is going to shoot with the weapon, engaging with all the main line gangs, mediation. We had registered conflict resolutions between communities, gangs, and stakeholders," Engel said.
“Data between 2013 and 2018, showed that the programme reduced violence by 43% and it could be attributed to the programme.”
Calls for evidence of programme success
Engel said that, despite the ShotSpotter project no longer being in existence, they relied on their own boots on the ground to detect shootings. The project itself could determine when and where a shooting was likely to take place, he said.
“We were also part of the implementation of the ShotSpotter, we helped install it, we were part of the response team, to respond to gunfire detection, he said.
"We could predict where violence could most likely happen and we could send a safety note to 3000 members in the community about violence and where it is happening and why."
In response to Andrews’ comments, Jay Jay Idel, executive director of Fight Against Crime SA (FACSA), said the City must be able to showcase the programme’s success.
“Rehabilitation and youth development are important, but programmes must be measured by their outcomes. How many young people have been reached? How many have left gang involvement, found employment or returned to education?" he said.
Dr Llewellyn Macmaster, chairperson of the Cape Crime Crisis Coalition (C4), said the Ceasefire project existed because it was driven by the community.
“The work was done by people, trusted community members and violence interrupters, not by microphones. The technology was a tool, not the solution," he said.
He said C4 was demanding a fundamental shift in the City’s approach to safety. This included a public audit and the publication of comprehensive data, including information about communities affected by gun violence.