18 October 2023
How are security challenges evolving as global instability heightens?
One of the primary intentions of protest (both peaceful and violent) is to be seen and heard. Therefore, strikes, riots and civil commotion (SRCC) tend to almost always occur in urban centres. From Hong Kong’s pro-democracy protests, the demonstrations against police brutality in the US and France’s pension reform strikes, in the last five years, cities across the world have witnessed civil unrest that is both varied and persistent.
The urge to riot seems to be an innate trait of human nature and its consequences are etched throughout history. People tend to rebel for one of two reasons: either an authority or power has taken an action that they cannot passively accept or they act because they believe there will be little or no consequences for their actions. Triggers are plentiful – police shootings, unpopular laws, divisive leaders, sport, rioting elsewhere and atrocities and their consequent handling.
Just under half of the world’s major cities face increased risks from strikes, riots and civil commotion (SRCC) in the next year, according to Verisk Maplecroft. In a post-pandemic, digital world, global instability is both palpable and viral, but how is the response to civil unrest evolving and what are the insurance ramifications of this heightened risk?
What were the security ramifications of the riots in Paris this year?
2000
business impacted
3000
arrests made
4000
police and gendarmes mobilised
On 27 June the police were involved in the killing of French teenager Nahel Merzouk in the Paris suburb Nanterre and demonstrations here led to 18 days of violence spread across central Paris, Marseille, Lyon, Pau, Toulouse and Lille.
Over 3,000 arrests were made, 2,000 businesses were impacted, with USD 1.1 billion worth of damage to businesses was recorded in the first week alone.
The riots led to France taking unprecedented security measures on Bastille Day, with 4,000 police and gendarmes mobilised across on July 13 and 14. On July 8, French Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne prohibited the sale, carrying, transport and use of pyrotechnical articles and fireworks to prevent the risk of serious disturbance of public order during the July 14 festivities.
The infrastructure for the 2024 Paris Olympics risked becoming embroiled in the violence. Surveillance increased on the Olympic Village in the Seine-St-Denis area and a building intended to house a training pool was left slightly damaged following an adjacent bus depot fire.
Although the damage was minor, the potential for civil unrest has fuelled security concerns for next year. The expanse of area that will require security for the opening ceremony has led chief Paris 2024 organiser Tony Estanguet to say the team is implementing unprecedented security arrangements, including controversial crowd monitoring technology and the hiring of 22,000 private security guards. Like the UK in 2012, armed forces may also be deemed necessary.
The role of social media
The 2023 riots are far from the first incidence of civil unrest in response to a police officer killing a teenager from one of Paris’ underprivileged communities. What may be changing though is the attitude of the state. In 2005 the electrocution of two teenagers who were hiding from the police led to three weeks of rioting and a state of emergency in Paris. At the time, the then Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy fuelled the violence by vowing to “clean out the estates” with a pressure washer and using the terms “yobs” and “trash”. However, President Emmanuel Macron called the 2023 shooting “inexplicable and inexcusable” and the officer responsible was detained facing investigation for voluntary manslaughter.
It would be tempting to attribute this change in tack to a softening of sentiment alone. However, subsequent commentary has highlighted an obvious difference: the 2023 event was caught on camera and shared on social media, clearly refuting the claim that Nahel Merzouk drove straight at the police.
An independent inquiry following the London 2011 riots, published in the following March, found that posts on social media and TV footage of the police watching people “loot at will” encouraged further rioting in London and other cities. The report also found that social media sites were used as an organisation tool by rioters. At the time of the riots, the then Prime Minister David Cameron called for a clampdown on social networking sites. However, the panel warned against this, concluding that "viral silence may have as many dangers as viral noise".
Twelve years on and society’s use and appetite for social media has continued to grow exponentially. Video footage, or reels and TikToks, are now commonplace. People intrinsically react to public disturbances by holding up their phones and documenting the event for the world to see. Macron also raised the idea of cutting access to social media platforms such as Snapchat and TikTok in July, claiming that they “change the way young people relate to reality”. His remarks drew widespread criticism and comparisons to authoritarian regimes.
Following Macron’s comments, the government said it was satisfied with tech companies' actions: in removing content, blocking accounts and providing information to law enforcement. Government spokesman Olivier Veran said it would be possible to enact temporary suspensions of functions such geolocation as Snapchat’s mapping tool is believed to have been used by rioters.
The Digital Services Act, which came into force on August 25, imposes new laws on social media platforms, which could face the potential of country-wide shutdowns if they fail to police illegal or harmful content. The new EU law will impact 19 platforms, including TikTok, Snapchat, Instagram and X (formerly Twitter), and all could face fines of up to 6% of global revenue if they do not comply.
South Africa: Past, present and future unrest
Following a similar pattern to Paris, the 2021 protests in response to the imprisonment of former President Jacob Zuma quickly gave way to rioting and looting, spreading across provinces from KwaZulu-Natal to Gauteng within two days. The violence was exacerbated by wider tensions than Zuma’s incarceration, including unemployment and the economic fallout from COVID-19.
The unrest caused significant property damage, which is generally excluded under standard insurance policies. The South African Special Risks Insurance Association (Sasria) is a state-owned short-term non-life insurer formed in 1979 in response to the Soweto uprising during Apartheid. Sasria provides covers businesses and individuals against civil unrest and commotion, public disorder, strikes, riots (politically and non-politically motivated) and terrorism within South Africa.
The deluge of claims it received in 2021 forced Sasria to admit it was not prepared for the loss prompting the association to request funds from the National Treasury. International and London market reinsurers provide a certain proportion of Sasria’s reinsurance. Reinsurers have consequently restricted cover and from April 2022 Sasria no longer offers excess of loss, limiting cover to R500 million per event.
This year has witnessed an increased threat of civil unrest in the form of anti-migrant group Operation Dudula, which has gained international attention for its targeting of businesses belonging to foreign nationals. Established in Soweto two years ago, Operation Dudula has harnessed the deep-rooted racial tensions and economic inequality, offering disenfranchised South Africans an outlet for their anger and fear.
The group has already stated that it aims to contest the general election next year and current polling suggests support for the incumbent African National Congress (ANC) could drop below 50% for the first time, leading to a coalition government.
The ANC is also grappling with the current energy crisis. The country’s national power utility, Eskom, has been struggling to meet electricity demand since 2007, and South Africa’s homes and businesses are now enduring blackouts for up to 12 hours a day. The energy crisis, xenophobia, and persistent inflation are likely to trigger further unrest, both in South Africa itself and potentially neighbouring countries next year, leaving businesses eager to secure property damage coverage should violence erupt once more.
Arthur J. Gallagher (UK) Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered Office: The Walbrook Building, 25 Walbrook, London EC4N 8AW. Registered in England and Wales. Company Number: 119013.