What are the perceptions, attitudes, and feelings of Arab-Muslim students about racism and prejudice towards their ethnicity and religious affiliation before September 11, 2001 and after?.

LLM / Department of Public Law

Adding something new to the understanding of To Kill a Mockingbird (1960), which is considered a twentieth-century classic, would be nearly impossible if not for the outlook of new historicism. Through a new historicist analysis of Harper Lee’s literary text parallel to non-fictional texts relating to the American justice system and civil rights, this essay explores how race affects U.S. institutions and society. Lee’s novel is contextualized by delving into the American South of the 1930s, American society and politics in the1960s and the racial landscape in America today, connecting them through the experiences of racial bias within the justice system and the civil rights movement. The essay explores the racial and cultural norms that governed the American justice system at the set time of the story. It analyzes the time of publication and the American society in which the novel made such an impact on the racial debate. Finally, it looks at the impact of the novel and its connection to the civil rights movement of the 1960s, the Black Lives Matter movement and readers today. In the spirit of new historicism, the mechanisms of racism and how they affect the population, both the oppressors and the oppressed, is highlighted showing parallels between Lee’s fictional world and American society over time. Through the experiences of the characters, the structures of racism translate to a time and place where the Black Lives Matter movement has infused new life to the civil rights movement worldwide. Looking at retellings of the historical Scottsboro trials, which inspired the story unfolding in To Kill a Mockingbird in light of the justice system, Maycomb county and its inhabitants serves as guides into the racial norms that is ingrained in American society and politics. The results reveal a society where racial segregation is constantly reinforced by legal, economical, and social barriers, despite constitutional efforts to level the playing field for all American citizens.

No description available.

The South African Refugees Act1 makes a distinction between an asylum seeker and a refugee. The Act defines an asylum seeker as “a person who is seeking recognition as a refugee in the Republic”. A refugee on the other hand, is a person “who has been granted asylum” in the Republic.2 The legal position in South Africa is that before a person is recognized as a refugee, he or she is protected by the Bill of Rights to a certain extent. In the case of Lawyers for Human Rights v Minister of Home Affairs the Constitutional court confirmed that the protection afforded by the Bill of Rights applies to everyone, including illegal foreigners and asylum seekers.3 This means that asylum seekers and refugees are entitled to most of the rights in the Constitution except those specifically reserved for citizens. Practically though, a refugee enjoys more rights than an asylum seeker. It is therefore in the interest of asylum seekers to have their status as refugees determined. The process of applying for refugee status can be a challenge for those seeking refuge in the Republic of South Africa. For applicants coming from non-English speaking countries, language barrier can also present its own challenges. In terms of the Refugees Act, the first application is to the Refugee Reception Officer at the refugee reception office. The application must be made in person.4 When an asylum seeker is deemed fit to qualify for asylum, he or she will be issued with a permit in terms of section 22 of the Refugees Act. The permit allows the asylum seeker to temporarily reside in South Africa until the finalisation of the asylum claim. This permit does not mean that the asylum seeker is already recognised as a refugee. The permit is an indication that the asylum seeker’s application as a refugee is not yet finalised. The application is considered finalised when it has gone through the hearing before the Status Determination Officer and any review or appeal following from that decision. It is the Refugee Status Determination Officer who will grant asylum or reject the application.5 For people applying for refugee status, the determination by the Status Determination Officer may in itself mark the beginning of the process to be repatriated back to the country they were running away from in the first place. An aggrieved applicant can also apply to have the adverse decision reviewed or even lodge an appeal in accordance with the provisions of the Refugees Act.6 For as long as the application is still pending, the government cannot deport any asylum seeker. An asylum seeker who enters the Republic of South Africa, either through a port of entry or illegally faces many challenges before he or she could reach a refugee reception office. Those who come in through a port of entry face being turned away by Immigration Officers due to lack of documentation. Often, asylum seekers find it hard to reach the refugee reception offices as there is no co-operation between the Immigration Officers, the South African Police Service and the functionaries in the refugee reception offices. To make things worse, the Immigration Amendment Act has reduced the days from fourteen to five, for asylum seekers without valid documentations to reach any refugee reception office. Since refugee reception offices are located only in five cities in the country, these have conditioned asylum seekers and refugees to stay and make their living in those cities as they are required to make frequent renewal of their permit. The closure of some of the refugee reception offices like the Johannesburg refugee reception office has caused a major concern to asylum seekers and refugees. This persistent closure of refugee reception offices may be seen as a further persecution in the eyes of asylum seekers and refugees. The inability of the different functionaries to differentiate between asylum seekers and economic migrants adds to the problem concerning the process of refugee status determination. Instead of seeking to identify people in need of protection from persecution or events seriously disturbing public order, the process is used as an immigration control and this causes more people to be turned away or returned to countries where their lives may be at risk. The communication between the asylum seeker and all the functionaries of the Department of Home Affairs is very important. The lack of professional interpretation functionaries to help asylum seekers who need interpretation contributes to the problems asylum seekers face. Often, asylum seekers have to provide their own interpreters if the Department is unable to do so. The purpose of the study is to investigate the status determination process from a South African perspective and to make recommendations which will try to resolve the problem(s) identified. / Public, Constitutional, & International / LLM

This study evaluates the court's approach towards the interpretation of administrative justice with specific reference to Roman v Williams 1997(2) SACR 754(C). Section 33 of the Constitution Act 108 of 1996 guarantees the right to administration justice. The elements of this right are lawfulness, reasonableness and procedurally fairness. Our courts are bound constitutionally to promote, develop, advance and protect the fundamental rights. This study provides the most effective approach towards the development of the fundamental right in our democratic society where the Bill of Rights binds legislature, executive and judiciary. / Administrative Law / LL.M. (Administrative Law)

Text in Afrikaans / Menseregte is 'n saak wat sedert die Tweede Wereldoorlog met sy grootskaalse vernietiging en chaos internasionaal al hoe sterker op die voorgrond begin tree het. Dit is veral buitelandse, maar ook binnelandse beskuldigings ten opsigte van rassisme en apartheid in ons land wat aanleiding begin gee het tot onderhandelings rakende die uitwerk van 'n handves van menseregte vir alle inwoners hier te lande Die historiese ontwikkeling van menseregte in belangrike Westerse lande, maar ook binne sosialistiese konteks, bied belangrike perspektiewe vir die verstaan van hierdie kwessie. Ongelukkig is die kerk se stem vir baie jare nie oor hierdie aangeleentheid gehoor nie. Ook het die NG Kerk dit beskou as 'n liberale, humanistiese en kommunistiese aanslag teen hulle "Skrifgetroue" lewensiening. Omrede so baie mense hulle besluite in terme van hulle geloofsbeskouing neem, word daar duidelikheid oor die saak gesoek in die Bybelse beskouing van die begrippe geregtigheid, menswaardigheid en vryheid. Sekere hermeneutiese probleme word onder oe geneem sodat die volle waarheid oor hierdie saak aan die orde kan kom. Na aanleiding van bogenoemde gebeure het die regering aan 'n Regskommissie opdrag gegee om 'n akte van menseregte op te stel. Die klem wat hierin op verskillende eerstegenerasieregte gele word ten koste van sekere noodsaaklike sosio-ekonomiese regte, wat vir soveel swart inwoners van ons land so belangrik is, word krities geevalueer. Hierteenoor le die ANC in sy konsep-manifes op realistiese wyse klem op hierdie sogenaamde tweedegenerasieregte en regstellende optrede. Daar word bevind dat di t die mees volledige en toepaslike dokument van sy soort in ons land is, omrede dit vanuit n situasie geskryf is wat deeglik rekening hou met die eiesoortige behoeftes van die Swartes. Die hele kwessie van menseregte waardeur mens teen mens beskerm word, bring oak die kwessie van diere- en plantregte na vore. n Omgewings-poli tieke beskouing wat voorkeur gee aan die sosio-ekonomiese belange van mense ten koste van omgewingsbewaring, word bespreek. Ten opsigte van hierdie sake word die mens deurgaans in die Skrif opgeroep om God in sy optrede teenoor sy medemens, dier en plant te vergestalt / Human rights is a matter which has come strongly to the fore since the Second World War with its wholesale destruction and chaos. It was especially foreign, but also internal accusations of racism and apartheid in our country which gave rise to negotiations to draw up a charter of human rights for all the inhabitants of our country. The historical development of human rights in important Western countries, but also in a socialist context, provides important perspectives for an understanding of the matter. Unfortunately the voice of the church was not heard on this matter for many years. The Dutch Reformed Church has also seen it as a liberal, humanist and communist attack on their "true" scriptural understanding of life. Because so many people make their decisions in terms of their faith, clarity is sought on this matter in the Biblical concepts of justice, human dignity and freedom. Certain hermeneutical problems are considered to arrive at an accurate understanding of the Biblical message. As a result of the above-mentioned chain of events, the government appointed a Law Commission to draw up a bill of human rights. The emphasis in this draft bill of rights which is laid on various first generation rights at the expense of essential socio-economic rights, which are so important to many black inhabitants of our country, is critically evaluated. In contrast, in its proposed bill of rights, the ANC emphasises this so-called second generation rights and affirmative action in a realistic way. It is found that this is the most complete and appropriate document of its kind in our country, because it was written from a situation which thoroughly takes account of the distinctive needs of the Blacks. The whole matter of human rights brings the matter of animal- and plant-rights to the fore. A view on the politics of the environment which prioritizes the socio-economic interests of the people at the cost of nature conservation, is discussed. With regard to these matters humankind is called upon throughout the Scriptures to manifest God in their conduct towards their fellow-man, animals and plants / Philosophy, Practical & Systematic Theology / D. Th. (Teologiese etiek)

Thesis (MA)--Stellenbosch University, 2014. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The Kurds, numbering somewhat 40 million, are the largest stateless nation worldwide. As smaller minorities, they are mainly spread in Iran, Iraq, Syria and Turkey in the Middle East. The Kurdish claims for self-determination have been a century-long struggle, and at the moment only the Kurds in north-Iraq have achieved the establishment of the semi-autonomous territory of Kurdistan, and the Kurds in Syria have autonomous control over the Kurdish region. Iran and Turkey with their significant Kurdish communities have not been successful in addressing the Kurdish claims of selfdetermination in an efficient and structural manner. This thesis assessed the possibilities of a successful implementation of a federal model in Iran and Turkey in order to address the Kurdish claims for self-determination. The main finding of this thesis is that the current political atmosphere in each country is not ready to make the necessary accommodations, as the transition to a federal system requires, and consequently will not be successful in addressing the Kurdish claims of self-determination. In Iran, it is found that the union between religion and politics, and consequently, the controlled nature of the theocratic system, will not accommodate for a society along federalist principles in which rule is divided amongst groups in society. In Turkey, it is found that while the political rule in Turkey is different from that in Iran, it is however believed that not even a possible transition to a direct Presidential system will change the governments fears of separatism, or the constitutional constraints which further hinders a federal transition. As seen from the assessment of the case studies, a federal implementation is not foreseen in Iran and Turkey within the nearest future, and will subsequently fail in addressing the Kurdish claims of self-determination. A transition of this manner requires dedication and willingness, and this research presents recommendations for the road towards a federalist political arrangement and greater Kurdish self-determination in order to reach a peaceful solution to the century-long Kurdish issue. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die Koerde wat 40 miljoen lede het is die grootste staatlose nasie in die wêreld. Hulle word hoofsaaklik in Iran, Irak, Sirië en Turkye in die Midde-Ooste aangetref. Die Koerde se aanspraak vir selfbeskikking is ‘n eeue-lange stryd: op die oomblik het slegs die Koerde in Noord-Irak die vestiging van die semi-outonome gebied van Kurdistan terwyl die Koerde in Sirië outonome beheer het oor die Koerdiese gebied. Beide Iran en Turkye het aansienlike Koerdiese gemeenskappe, maar was onsuksesvol om die Koerdiese se aanspraak op selfbeskikking aan te spreek. Hierdie tesis assesseer die moontlikheid vir die suksesvolle implimentering van ‘n federale model in Iran en Irak om die Koerdiese aanspraak vir selfbeskikking aan te spreek. Die hoof bevinding van hierdie tesis is dat die huidige politieke klimaat in elkeen van hierdie lande ongunstig is: hierdie lande is nie gereed om die oorgang tot ‘n federale sisteem te maak nie, en sal gevolglik onsuksesvol wees in die aanspreek van Koerdiese aanspraak op selfbeskikking. In Iran is daar geen onderskeid tussen godsdiens en politiek nie: die streng beheerde teokratiese sisteem sal nie die ontwikkeling van ‘n samelewing langs federale beginsels toelaat waar mag tussen verskillende groepe in die samelewing verdeel is nie. In Turkye waar die politieke sisteem verskil van dié van Iran, sal ‘n moontlike oorgang na ‘n Presidensiële sisteem nie die vrese van separatisme verander of die grondwetlike beperkings verander wat ‘n federale oorgang verhinder nie. Soos uit die gevallestudies blyk kan ‘n federale sisteem nie in die nabye toekoms in Turkye en Iran voorsien word nie en sal hierdie lande gevolglik misluk in die aanspreek van die Koerdiese aanspraak op selfbeskikking. ‘n Politieke oorgang van hierdie soort benodig toewyding en bereidwilligheid, en hierdie navorsing stel aanbevelings voor vir die pad na ‘n federale politiese ooreenkoms en groter Koerdiese selfbeskikking. Dit is nodig indien ‘n vreedsame oplossing vir die eeuelange Koerdiese kwessie gevind moet word.

This study examines the nature and intensity of collective action in five Central American nations during the period 1950-1980. Using a historical comparative analysis, I found that Guatemala, El Salvador and Nicaragua have had guerrilla movements and Honduras and Costa Rica have not. Instead, Honduras and Costa Rica have developed workers and peasant movements that are important political forces in their respective societies. These differences are explained by comparing and contrasting the five countries in terms of distribution of land and income, their political structure and their political influence of the United States. Unequal distribution of land and income is commonly thought to produce frustration and discontent, and in turn, higher frequencies of collective action. In Central America, land and income inequality have remained, for the most part, constant, while the nature and intensity of collective action varies over time and across country. Consequently, I concluded that inequality alone does not facilitate the origin and development of forms of collective protest. More compelling theoretical arguments can be made for the political structure of each country and the political influence of the United States as preconditions for the nature and intensity of collective action. The strength of worker and peasant organizations, and their ability to protest non-violently during these times, occurred when the United States encouraged democratic government in these nations. These forms of governance provided freedom and protection for organizing and collective protest. But as the United States supported and encouraged repressive governments, non-violent actions were repressed, and in turn, violent forms of protest originated. Then guerrilla movements appeared and developed when the United States reduced or withdrew military assistance to these repressive governments.

In this essay I attempt to examine critically Michael Walzer's just war theory. I begin by pointing out what I take to be philosophically sound about his conception; in particular, his philosophical commitment to a doctrine of human rights as being morally decisive for questions of war. He argues, and I think correctly, that questions of justified wars and justified means within wars are ultimately questions about whether or not human rights are being respected. Unfortunately, Walzer does not always formulate his war principles in light of his fundamental commitment to human rights, and where he fails to do so, supreme emergencies and nuclear deterrence, I argue that his account becomes incoherent. At bottom, Walzer supposes, in these instances, that while individual rights may not be overriden for purely utilitarian reasons, rights may, nevertheless, be overridden for the sake of the political community. What this amounts to, for Walzer, is the following claim: that it is more just to secure the rights of a collection of individuals than it is to secure the rights of one individual. If so, it is morally permissible to suspend some individual rights for the sake of many individual rights. And even though I will hold that this argument is very persuasive, I will suggest that it is mistaken from a moral point of view which takes human rights to be morally conclusive.