South African Police Service v Police and Prisons Civil Rights Union and Another

During the 2007 national public service strike, members of the Police and Prisons Civil Rights Union (POPCRU), including employees of the South African Police Service (SAPS), intended to participate in strike action. SAPS employees fall into two categories: members appointed under the South African Police Service Act 68 of 1995 (SAPS Act), and non-member personnel employed under the Public Service Act 103 of 1994 (PSA) who perform support functions. SAPS approached the Labour Court to interdict POPCRU members from striking, contending that all SAPS employees render an essential service under the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 (LRA) and are therefore prohibited from striking. The Labour Court, and subsequently the Labour Appeal Court, held that only SAPS members (as defined in the SAPS Act) are engaged in an essential service, and that PSA-employed non-members are not. SAPS sought leave to appeal to the Constitutional Court.

Leave to appeal was granted, but the appeal was dismissed. The decision of the Labour Appeal Court was upheld, confirming that only SAPS members are prohibited from striking, while non-member personnel employed under the Public Service Act may lawfully strike.

This case is the Constitutional Court’s first authoritative interpretation of the meaning of 'essential service' under the Labour Relations Act. It clarifies the scope of the limitation on the constitutional right to strike, particularly within the SAPS, and affirms that limitations must be narrowly construed. The judgment reinforces the principle that not all employees within an institution designated as an essential service are automatically barred from striking; only those actually engaged in the essential functions are.