PROJECT: DELAYED NATIONAL REGISTER FOR SEX OFFENDERS
- Isabel Spies
- Nov 3
- 8 min read
PLEASE SHARE THIS PUBLIC DOCUMENT
In South Africa, the delayed full rollout of the National Register for Sex Offenders (NRSO) continues to put children at risk.
Several high-profile incidents illustrate the real consequences:
at Vleiplaas Primary, a staff member assaulted a pupil because background checks and internal vetting failed to flag risk;
in the Western Cape, a 12-year-old learner was raped by an acting principal whose prior sexual-offence conviction had gone undetected;
and in Worcester in May 2025, a teacher was sentenced to life imprisonment for raping a learner during school hours, a case highlighting in recruitment and oversight.
These incidents demonstrate that, while the register exists in a limited form, its restricted access and
incomplete institutional use leaves children vulnerable to harm.
The incidents underscore the urgent need for routine, transparent, and fully integrated vetting procedures across schools,
early-childhood centres, and foster-care placements.
REASONS FOR THE DELAY:
LEGAL/LEGISLATIVE CONSTRAINTS:
The register is governed by the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act 32 of 2007 and related regulations, which currently impose strict confidentiality and disclosure provisions.
One key obstacle is that making the register publicly accessible in its full form would require changes (or a review) of those confidentiality/disclosure clauses.
According to the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, they have initiated a multi-stakeholder consultative process to review the law and ensure compliance with privacy/data-protection laws (such as the Protection of Personal Information Act 4 of 2013—POPIA).
Until those legislative hurdles are addressed, the register cannot be made fully public without risking legal challenge (for example, for violating the right to privacy of persons included in the register).
PHASED ACCESS/IMPLEMENTATION APPROACH:
The ministry has stated that instead of full immediate public release, it will adopt a phased approach:
Phase 1:
Give key stakeholders (schools, early childhood development centres, organisations working with children) access to the register or to clearance processes.
Phase 2:
Expand access to general employers.
This staged rollout means that the full public access by February 2025 did not occur, as the legal groundwork for that is still being laid.
PRIVACY/DATA PROTECTION CONCERNS:
Apart from the sexual offences law, the government has flagged concerns that publishing the register broadly could infringe on offenders’ privacy rights — e.g., lifelong stigma, risk of vigilante action, data-security issues.
The register is currently designed to be accessible under certain conditions (e.g., employers, foster/adoption vetting) but is not open to the public at large.
OPERATIONAL CHALLENGES:
It was reported that as of early 2025, the register had more than ~32,000 names with additional ~10,000 cases pending inclusion.
Also, vetting has been minimal: e.g., fewer than 1 in 700 members of the South African Police Service workforce had been screened against the register.
These gaps mean the infrastructure around the register (updates, coverage, integration with screening) is still being strengthened.
PUBLIC COMMITMENT VS. PRACTICAL READINESS:
The minister, Mmamoloko Kubayi, had publicly committed to making the register public by the end of February 2025.
However, when the date approached, the ministry backtracked, citing the above issues and stating that a timeline is yet to be set.
Activist groups have expressed frustration that the announced date passed with no public release.
In short, the delay is not simply bureaucratic procrastination but reflects a mix of legal complexity (balancing offender rights/privacy vs public safety), operational readiness, and a deliberate phased access strategy.
That said, many critics, including Specialised Security Services, argue the urgency of the GBV crisis
means the delay is unacceptable.
IMPACT ON VICTIMS, ESPECIALLY CHILDREN:
1. REDUCED PREVENTIVE PROTECTION:
One of the main rationales for making the register publicly accessible is to enable schools, crèches, employers, foster-care agencies, and parents to vet individuals working with children and to avoid placing known offenders in positions of trust.
The inability to access the register widely limits this protective screening.
Without public or unrestricted access, institutions may hire or place individuals whose names are on the register but are not visible to them, thus increasing risk.
The ministry itself admitted that only limited vetting of police staff has been done.
Children, especially, are at risk in environments like schools, early childhood development (ECD) centres, and foster/kinship care settings where trust is placed in adults.
Limited registry access undermines this trust-protection mechanism.
2. SURVIVORS' RIGHTS AND SENSE OF ACCOUNTABILITY:
For victims (including children), public disclosure of offender identities can be a form of recognition/visibility of their trauma and a deterrent to further offending.
Delays may send a message that the system is slow to act, undermining confidence.
When the register remains private and offenders remain hidden, survivors may feel their safety is secondary to the rights of offenders (as some critics argue).
This can inhibit reporting and long-term healing.
3. REPEAT-OFFENDING AND BROADER SOCIETAL HARM:
One argument for a public register is that known offenders may re-offend if their identities and histories remain hidden.
The delay effectively allows those convicted to remain less visible to communities and institutions.
Given the high incidence of sexual offences in South Africa (particularly involving children and vulnerable persons), the delay thus has a concrete risk in terms of further victimisation.
4. CHILD SPECIFIC IMPLICATIONS (EDUCATION/FOSTER CARE):
In settings like schools/ECD centres, an accessible register or vetting system is critical.
The delay means principals, boards, and parents may not have full information when vetting staff or caregivers.
This poses a direct risk to children’s safety and well-being.
In foster care, kinship care, adoption, and placement of children with people who might have sexual offence convictions is a risk.
The register’s limited access hampers transparent placement processes.
5. PUBLIC TRUST AND CULTURE OF PROTECTION:
Beyond specific individual risk, the delay affects public trust: children’s parents, communities may feel that protection systems are not functioning.
This can have broader consequences for reporting, parental vigilance, and community engagement in prevention.
It may also signal to offenders that their identities remain shielded, thus reducing the deterrent effect, which has ramifications for children’s safety long-term.
The NRSO’s planned public roll-out by February 2025 has been delayed due to legal/privacy issues, a need for legislative review, phased implementation, and operational readiness.
For victims — especially children — this delay means less access to knowledge about known offenders in environments where children are cared for or educated; increased risk of repeat offending; weaker institutional vetting; and potentially diminished trust in systems of protection.
While the register still exists and is accessible in a limited way (for employer/student/foster-care vetting), the full public transparency component remains pending.
Given South Africa’s high levels of sexual violence and the particular vulnerability of children, the delay is being viewed by many stakeholders as a serious concern.
Examples of documented incidents and data showing how the delay in full access to the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act 32 of 2007’s register (the National Register for Sex Offenders or NRSO) affects children:
A recent investigation found that fewer than one in ten teachers in South Africa had been vetted against the NRSO — meaning that schools may still have staff with past sexual-offence convictions working with children.
In one province, 49 convicted sex offenders had been identified in schools after partial vetting.
The vetting process is described as “crippled by confusion, non-compliance ... lack of coordination”.
This directly creates a risk for children in school settings.
Low conviction rates for child sexual abuse cases make the need for prevention and transparency more urgent.
One NGO found that only 4% of child-abuse cases in the past five years resulted in convictions.
With so many cases unresolved, children remain exposed and waiting for justice.
The register remains inaccessible to the general public and is only usable (so far) by employers/institutions working with children or the mentally disabled.
So parents, caregivers and community members cannot easily check whether someone might be listed.
This limitation reduces the “extra-layer” of protection that public access might provide.
Legal/constitutional issues are slowing the register’s full roll-out.
Issues include the offender’s right to privacy, risks of defamation/incorrect listing, vigilantism, and compliance with the Protection of Personal Information Act 4 of 2013 (POPIA).
While it is important to balance rights, the delay means that protection is weaker in the interim.
The register’s purpose specifically includes protecting children and persons with mental disabilities.
The official government service page states that the NRSO is “a record of names of those found guilty of sexual offences against children and mentally disabled people.”
In short, because the register is not fully public, and because institutional vetting is incomplete, children remain vulnerable to spending time in institutions or with caregivers whose records might include past sexual-offence convictions.
Still, that information may not have been checked or disclosed.
In conclusion, the National Register for Sex Offenders is a critical tool for safeguarding children and vulnerable populations, but its current limitations expose systemic gaps in protection. High-profile cases of assault and sexual abuse in schools demonstrate the urgency of implementing comprehensive vetting processes and making the register fully functional.
While legal and privacy considerations necessitate careful rollout, parents, educators, and communities must take proactive steps to reduce risk and protect children. Accelerated action, transparency, and vigilance remain essential until the register achieves its intended purpose: a safer environment where children can grow, learn,
and thrive free from the threat of sexual abuse.
RELEVANT NEWS ARTICLES:
Specialised Security Services invites the public to the Mike Bolhuis Daily Projects WhatsApp Channel.
This channel is important in delivering insights into the latest crime trends, awareness, warnings and the exposure of criminals.
How to Join the WhatsApp Channel:
1. Make sure you have the latest version of WhatsApp on your device.
2. Click on the link below to join the Mike Bolhuis Daily Projects WhatsApp Channel:
3. Follow the prompts to join the channel.
4. Make sure you click on "Follow", then click on the "bell"-icon (🔔)
CONTACT MR MIKE BOLHUIS FOR SAFETY AND SECURITY MEASURES, PROTECTION, OR AN INVESTIGATION IF NEEDED.
ALL INFORMATION RECEIVED WILL BE TREATED IN THE STRICTEST CONFIDENTIALITY AND EVERY IDENTITY WILL BE PROTECTED.
Regards,
Mike Bolhuis
Specialist Investigators into
Serious Violent, Serious Economic Crimes & Serious Cybercrimes
PSIRA Reg. 1590364/421949
Mobile: +27 82 447 6116
E-mail: mike@mikebolhuis.co.za
Fax: 086 585 4924
Follow us on Facebook to view our projects -
EXTREMELY IMPORTANT: All potential clients need to be aware that owing to the nature of our work as specialist investigators there are people who have been caught on the wrong side of the law - who are trying to discredit me - Mike Bolhuis and my organisation Specialised Security Services - to get themselves off the hook. This retaliation happens on social media and creates doubt about our integrity and ability. Doubt created on social media platforms is both unwarranted and untrue. We strongly recommend that you make up your minds concerning me and our organisation only after considering all the factual information - to the exclusion of hearsay and assumptions. Furthermore, you are welcome to address your concerns directly with me should you still be unsatisfied with your conclusions. While the internet provides a lot of valuable information, it is also a platform that distributes a lot of false information. The distribution of false information, fake news, slander and hate speech constitutes a crime that can be prosecuted by law. Your own research discretion and discernment are imperative when choosing what and what not to believe.
STANDARD RULES APPLY: Upon appointment, we require a formal mandate with detailed instructions. Please take note that should you not make use of our services – you may not under any circumstance use my name or the name of my organisation as a means to achieve whatever end.
POPI ACT 4 of 2013 South Africa: Mike Bolhuis' "Specialised Security Services" falls under Section 6 of the act. Read more here: https://mikebh.link/fntdpv
SSS TASK TEAM:
Copyright © 2015- PRESENT | Mike Bolhuis Specialised Security Services | All rights reserved.
Our mailing address is:
Mike Bolhuis Specialised Security Services
PO Box 15075 Lynn East
Pretoria, Gauteng 0039
South Africa
Add us to your address book
THIS PUBLIC DOCUMENT WAS INTENDED TO BE SHARED, PLEASE DO SO.