LLM / Department pf Public Law / Capital punishment has been widely applied by countries since time immemorial. The concept, however, is highly controversial. That is, on the one hand, the anti-abolitionist states argue that it is an effective form of punishment, on the other side; the abolitionist states contend that it is an unjustifiable infringement of people’s fundamental right to life. There have been calls, both regionally and globally, for a moratorium on the death penalty. The Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights was promulgated as a move towards the abolition of the death penalty in all countries and states in the world. Article 1 (2) of the instrument states that, “Each state party shall take all necessary measures to abolish the death penalty within its jurisdiction”. At regional level, Article 4 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights provides that all human beings are inviolable and entitled to the respect and integrity of their person. As such, no one may be deprived arbitrarily of this right. In addition, Article 1 of the Protocol to the African Charter provides that the death penalty shall not be applied by state parties in their territories or any person within their jurisdiction. Despite the current global and regional trends towards the abolition of the death penalty and its inherent controversy, Zimbabwe remains anti-abolitionist, and entrenched the death penalty in section 48 (2) of its 2013 Constitution. Adopting a doctrinal research methodology, the study critically analyses section 48 (2) (d) of Zimbabwe’s Constitution, and examines how it affects key fundamental rights as well as the way forward in the light of the international human rights standards on the death penalty. / NRF

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Text in Afrikaans / Executions were discontinued during November 1989. In February 1990 the State President announced a moratorium on executions. Since 27 July 1990 the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1990 effected important changes to the substantive law and procedure regarding the death sentence. The "new" death sentence dispensation was applied by the courts and the moratorium would be lifted as soon as the new dispensation became effective. That never materialised. The death sentence issue was dealt with in a game of political compromise. Criminal law and the esteem of the Government suffered as a result. Judicial frustration and uncertainty developed regarding application of the death sentence. The opportunity was seized by the abolitionists to attain their ideal. The Constitutional Court declared the death sentence unconstitutional. Presently a final Constitution is being drafted which will probably finally do away with the death sentence. An effective process of denigration of the death sentence thus resulted from the moratorium on executions. / Teregstellings is gedurende November 1989 gestaak. Op 2 Februarie 1990 het die Staatspresident 'n moratorium op teregstellings afgekondig. Vanaf 27 Julie 1990 het die Strafregwysigingswet, 1990, belangrike verstellings aan die materiele en prosessuele reg met betrekking tot die doodvonnis gemaak. Die "nuwe" doodvonnisbedeling is deur die howe toegepas. Die moratorium sou opgehef word sodra die "nuwe bedeling" op dreef was. Dit het nie gebeur nie. 'n Spel van kornprornie-politiek random die doodvonniskwessie het horn afgespeel. Die strafregpleging en die Regering se aansien het daaronder gely. Regterlike frustrasie het posgevat en regsonsekerheid oar die toepassing van die doodvonnis het ontstaan. Die geleentheid is deur die afskaffers aangegryp om hul ideaal te verwesenlik. Die Konstitusionele Hof het die doodvonnis ongrondwetlik verklaar. Tans word 'n finale Grondwet geskryf wat waarskynlik die doodvonnis gaan afskaf. 'n Effektiewe proses van aftakeling van die doodvonnis het dus sedert die moratorium op teregstellings plaasgevind. / Criminal & Procedural Law / LL. M.

The dissertation critically examines and compares the decisions of the Constitutional Court and the High Courts in cases dealing with the right to life, as contained in section 11 of the Constitution of South Africa Act 108 of 1996. The dissertation analysis the issues of adjudication and the concept of justice in perspective. The main question is as follows: Are the Constitutional Court decisions objective, based on the interpretation of the constitutional text, or do they rather reflect the individual judge(s) personal perspective(s) or preference(s). The purpose of this dissertation is to undertake a comparative study and analysis of the Constitutional Court decisions on the right to life, same aspect from different perspective, and show that the right to life is not given proper effect to on account of the subjective approach to its interpretation undertaken by the judges. It examines and scrutinises the Constitutional Court’s adjudication process. It found that the law is indeterminable, because the court’s decisions are not based on the interpretation of the law, but on the individual judges’ background and personal preferences. This is so because the court uses the majority rule principle in its decisions: The perception of the majority of the judges becomes a decision of the court. It is argued that when taking a decision a judge does not apply the law but instead uses the law to justify his predetermined decision on the matter. The conclusion supports the critical legal scholars’ theory relating to the indeterminacy of the law. It tests the objectivity of the judges using their own previous decisions. / Criminal & Procedural Law / LLM

The objective of this thesis is to assess the impact and influence of South Africa's Constitutional Court in the first two years of our democracy. To achieve this objective, some of the definitive and controversial cases already decided by the Court have been selected and analysed in an attempt to glean some jurisprudential perspectives of the Court. It focuses on the work of the Court over the past two years. It deals with the evolution of South Africa into a democracy, and analyzes the South African legal system prior to the beginning of the process of transformation. It briefly surveys the evolution of our constitutional system, dating back from the pre-1910 colonial period and provides a broad outline of the legal system in the post-April 1994 period of transformation. It analyzes the Court from the point of view of, inter alia, its composition, jurisdiction and powers. The Court is also contrasted with courts in other jurisdictions which exercise full judicial review. The Court's emerging jurisprudence is examined. A review is made, inter alia, of the Court's understanding of, and approach to, the questions of the values underpinning the post-apartheid society and its constitutional system, and constitutional interpretation. The right against self-incrimination and South African company law and the two relevant Constitutional Court cases are discussed. The collection of evidence by the State and the constitutionality of provisions relating to search and seizure and the taking of fingerprints are looked into. The Court's approach to statutory presumptions and criminal prosecutions; some aspects of our appeals procedures; an accused's right to be assisted by a lawyer at state expense; the question of a fair trial and access to information; capital punishment; corporal punishment; committal to prison for debt; and the certification of constitutions is analyzed. Two of the cases in which the provinces clashed with the national government on the distribution of posers between provinces and the national government are discussed. The conclusion is that the Court has, overall, hitherto acquitted itself well in the handling of particularly the controversial quasi-political questions that arose in the cases it has decided. / Constitutional, International & Indigenous Law / L.L. D. (Law)

The dissertation critically examines and compares the decisions of the Constitutional Court and the High Courts in cases dealing with the right to life, as contained in section 11 of the Constitution of South Africa Act 108 of 1996. The dissertation analysis the issues of adjudication and the concept of justice in perspective. The main question is as follows: Are the Constitutional Court decisions objective, based on the interpretation of the constitutional text, or do they rather reflect the individual judge(s) personal perspective(s) or preference(s). The purpose of this dissertation is to undertake a comparative study and analysis of the Constitutional Court decisions on the right to life, same aspect from different perspective, and show that the right to life is not given proper effect to on account of the subjective approach to its interpretation undertaken by the judges. It examines and scrutinises the Constitutional Court’s adjudication process. It found that the law is indeterminable, because the court’s decisions are not based on the interpretation of the law, but on the individual judges’ background and personal preferences. This is so because the court uses the majority rule principle in its decisions: The perception of the majority of the judges becomes a decision of the court. It is argued that when taking a decision a judge does not apply the law but instead uses the law to justify his predetermined decision on the matter. The conclusion supports the critical legal scholars’ theory relating to the indeterminacy of the law. It tests the objectivity of the judges using their own previous decisions. / Criminal and Procedural Law / LL. M.

Text in Afrikaans / Executions were discontinued during November 1989. In February 1990 the State President announced a moratorium on executions. Since 27 July 1990 the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1990 effected important changes to the substantive law and procedure regarding the death sentence. The "new" death sentence dispensation was applied by the courts and the moratorium would be lifted as soon as the new dispensation became effective. That never materialised. The death sentence issue was dealt with in a game of political compromise. Criminal law and the esteem of the Government suffered as a result. Judicial frustration and uncertainty developed regarding application of the death sentence. The opportunity was seized by the abolitionists to attain their ideal. The Constitutional Court declared the death sentence unconstitutional. Presently a final Constitution is being drafted which will probably finally do away with the death sentence. An effective process of denigration of the death sentence thus resulted from the moratorium on executions. / Teregstellings is gedurende November 1989 gestaak. Op 2 Februarie 1990 het die Staatspresident 'n moratorium op teregstellings afgekondig. Vanaf 27 Julie 1990 het die Strafregwysigingswet, 1990, belangrike verstellings aan die materiele en prosessuele reg met betrekking tot die doodvonnis gemaak. Die "nuwe" doodvonnisbedeling is deur die howe toegepas. Die moratorium sou opgehef word sodra die "nuwe bedeling" op dreef was. Dit het nie gebeur nie. 'n Spel van kornprornie-politiek random die doodvonniskwessie het horn afgespeel. Die strafregpleging en die Regering se aansien het daaronder gely. Regterlike frustrasie het posgevat en regsonsekerheid oar die toepassing van die doodvonnis het ontstaan. Die geleentheid is deur die afskaffers aangegryp om hul ideaal te verwesenlik. Die Konstitusionele Hof het die doodvonnis ongrondwetlik verklaar. Tans word 'n finale Grondwet geskryf wat waarskynlik die doodvonnis gaan afskaf. 'n Effektiewe proses van aftakeling van die doodvonnis het dus sedert die moratorium op teregstellings plaasgevind. / Criminal and Procedural Law / LL. M.