CASE STUDY: GUN CONTROL ALLIANCE 

South Africa's socio-political landscape has undergone a process of fundamental change. 

The privileges of those that were previously guaranteed access and influence have been 
diminished; others are rising to positions of influence. Despite considerable political change, 
however, certain sectors remain strong and others weak. Although South African civil 
society, with its long history of struggle and advocacy, remains active and involved in issues 
of change and governance, it has been weakened by a withdrawal of international financial 
support and a loss of personnel to government and the private sector. Organised labour, 
which developed strong institutions and traditions in the 1970s and 1980s, remains 
relatively strong and is represented in the National Economic Development and Labour 
Council (NEDLAC). 
The Congress of South African Unions (COSATU), the largest federation of unions, is part of a 
tripartite alliance with the ruling ANC and the South African Communist Party (SACP), with 
members on the ANC party list. 
Organised business has had to adapt to a sharply different political system and a new 
culture of accountability. Typically, it has responded with new lobbying techniques – some 
effective, some less so. In South Africa, lobbyists tend to be directly employed by 
organisations that wish to present their case to government. Lobbyists have become an 
institution in many Westminster-style systems, giving rise to debates about their morality 
and whether or not their (particularly commercial) efforts should be subjected to some form 
of control or code of conduct. 
In this fluid advocacy environment, it is important to ensure that public participation does 
not become skewed in favour of any one sector. No sector, particularly the less powerful 
and organised, should be excluded or marginalised. 
 
Case Study: The Gun Control Alliance 
If you give people information, they know what to do with it. 
Adele Kirsten, Gun Free South Africa 
When the Portfolio Committee on Safety and Security in the National Assembly called for 
submissions on the Firearms Control Bill, the stage was set for a radical divide between 
those who supported relatively unfettered ownership of guns against those who, in varying 
degrees, sought tougher controls. With more power, more money and a louder voice, there 
was a danger that the gun owners lobby would dominate the scene. 
Gun Free South Africa (GFSA) recognised the importance of building broad support for the 
introduction of stricter firearm legislation. In order to do this, it did three things. It mounted 
a public information and awareness campaign. It built a broad tactical alliance, which agreed 
on specific legal reforms. In addition, it ensured that members of the Gun Control Alliance 
were empowered to lobby Parliament effectively. GFSA had little funding for such a 
campaign, yet it succeeded in building and maintaining an articulate community voice in the 
ensuing debate. 
One of the most powerful tools developed by GFSA was the Gun Free Zone (GFZ) project. 
Through this project, GFSA developed relationships with a number of communities who had 
declared their public spaces gun-free. These relationships would form the foundation for the 
broad consensus that was the essential strength of the Gun Control Alliance. 
The Gun Control Alliance was built around the Gun Control Charter – essentially a list of 
minimum demands to be included in a new Firearms Control Act. The Charter was 
developed in consultation with as many stakeholders as possible, followed by an intensive 
campaign aimed at persuading organisations and individuals to endorse it. The over 200 
national and regional organisations that did so became members of the Gun Control 
Alliance. 
 
In order to encourage communities to make submissions at the parliamentary hearings on 
the Bill, GFSA provided assistance to help them take advantage of the opportunities offered. 
Two tools were of particular importance. One was a plain language summary of the 
legislation, focusing particularly on those aspects included in the Charter. The second was a 
document – Making sure your voice stops a bullet – aimed at giving people the necessary 
skills to make submissions and lobby parliament. These tools were use d at workshops 
where communities raised local issues and concerns, out of which they prepared the 
submissions they would later make to Parliament. 
The participation of the Gun Control Alliance in the debate had a number of results. First, as 
a well-informed lobby group, it was able to counter the claims of the better-resourced gun 
owners' lobby, thereby supporting the parliamentary committee in its efforts to discuss and 
consider the Bill. 
Secondly, its efforts did much to raise public awareness about the hazards of firearms and 
their impact on communities. Thirdly, and perhaps most important of all, community 
representatives claimed that the process had empowered them. As one of them said: 
No one in our community had ever made a submission before ... (so) the submission pack 
was very good. It empowered us. We learnt that individuals could make a submission. 
Also, if we had to make other submissions, we could use these guidelines, which help us 
stay focused on the areas that affect us.