Generally the Courts have a discretion to impose sentence. Violent crime was rampant in South Africa. The response of the legislature in dealing with crime was to enact legislation in 1997 like sections 51 to 53 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997 which prescribe severe mandatory sentences for a large number of serious offences like murder, rape and armed robbery. This legislation come into effect on 1 May 1998 and was to have effect for two years. The President could with the concurrence of Parliament by proclamation extend its operation for one year, that was in fact done. The latest extension of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997 was for a further two years making the minimum sentence provisions valid until 30 April 2005. The Courts did not like these mandatory sentences because of the limitation it places on judicial discretion and dealt with this legislation that limited their judicial discretion restrictively in order to defend their sentencing discretion. Although the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 105 of 1997 was held not to be unconstitutional the Courts stll sought to give it a narrow interpretation. This research paper include an outline of the Criminal Law Amendment Act / the Constitutional challenges that were brought against the Criminal Law Amendment Act / the judicial interpretation of the Criminal Law Amendment Act as well as the applicability of the Criminal Law Amendment Act to District Courts and juvenile ovenders / the procedural requirements that must be complied with in the Criminal Law Amendment Act and its consequences if not complied with. This paper examined how the Courts defined substantial and compelling circumstances, the approaches adopted by the Courts and when deviation from the Criminal Law Amendment Act can take place. It also include the challenges posed by mandatory minimum sentence legislation as well as recommendations for the improved implementation of the Criminal Law Amendment Act.

Generally the Courts have a discretion to impose sentence. Violent crime was rampant in South Africa. The response of the legislature in dealing with crime was to enact legislation in 1997 like sections 51 to 53 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997 which prescribe severe mandatory sentences for a large number of serious offences like murder, rape and armed robbery. This legislation come into effect on 1 May 1998 and was to have effect for two years. The President could with the concurrence of Parliament by proclamation extend its operation for one year, that was in fact done. The latest extension of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997 was for a further two years making the minimum sentence provisions valid until 30 April 2005. The Courts did not like these mandatory sentences because of the limitation it places on judicial discretion and dealt with this legislation that limited their judicial discretion restrictively in order to defend their sentencing discretion. Although the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 105 of 1997 was held not to be unconstitutional the Courts stll sought to give it a narrow interpretation. This research paper include an outline of the Criminal Law Amendment Act / the Constitutional challenges that were brought against the Criminal Law Amendment Act / the judicial interpretation of the Criminal Law Amendment Act as well as the applicability of the Criminal Law Amendment Act to District Courts and juvenile ovenders / the procedural requirements that must be complied with in the Criminal Law Amendment Act and its consequences if not complied with. This paper examined how the Courts defined substantial and compelling circumstances, the approaches adopted by the Courts and when deviation from the Criminal Law Amendment Act can take place. It also include the challenges posed by mandatory minimum sentence legislation as well as recommendations for the improved implementation of the Criminal Law Amendment Act.

Magister Legum - LLM / Generally the Courts have a discretion to impose sentence. Violent crime was rampant in South Africa. The response of the legislature in dealing with crime was to enact legislation in 1997 like sections 51 to 53 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997 which prescribe severe mandatory sentences for a large number of serious offences like murder, rape and armed robbery. This legislation come into effect on 1 May 1998 and was to have effect for two years. The President could with the concurrence of Parliament by proclamation extend its operation for one year, that was in fact done. The latest extension of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997 was for a further two years making the minimum sentence provisions valid until 30 April 2005. The Courts did not like these mandatory sentences because of the limitation it places on judicial discretion and dealt with this legislation that limited their judicial discretion restrictively in order to defend their sentencing discretion. Although the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 105 of 1997 was held not to be unconstitutional the Courts stll sought to give it a narrow interpretation. This research paper include an outline of the Criminal Law Amendment Act; the Constitutional challenges that were brought against the Criminal Law Amendment Act; the judicial interpretation of the Criminal Law Amendment Act as well as the applicability of the Criminal Law Amendment Act to District Courts and juvenile ovenders; the procedural requirements that must be complied with in the Criminal Law Amendment Act and its consequences if not complied with. This paper examined how the Courts defined substantial and compelling circumstances, the approaches adopted by the Courts and when deviation from the Criminal Law Amendment Act can take place. It also include the challenges posed by mandatory minimum sentence legislation as well as recommendations for the improved implementation of the Criminal Law Amendment Act. / South Africa

Legislation regulating minimum sentences in South Africa was re-introduced by sections 51 to 53 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997 which came into operation on 1 May 1998. These provisions were regarded as a temporary measure to be effective for two years, where after they were extended from time to time. After they had been extended for several times, section 51 was rendered permanent on 31 December 2007 by the Criminal Law (Sentencing) Amendment Act 38 of 2007. At the same time sections 52 and 53 were repealed by the same Act. Minimum sentence legislation was the result of a call by the community for heavier penalties and for the offenders to serve more realistic terms of imprisonment. There was also a general dissatisfaction about the perceived leniency of sentences imposed by the courts for serious crimes. During 1996 and in the wake of these concerns the Minister of Justice requested the South African Law Reform Commission to investigate all aspects of sentencing in South Africa. A Project Committee chaired by a judge of the High Court was appointed and it operated from the late 1996 to March 1998. Minimum sentences for certain serious crimes were one of the options to be investigated by the Project Committee. Consequent to this the Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997 was promulgated with effect from 1 May 1998. The legislature intended this Act to defer criminal activity, to avoid disparities in sentencing and to deal harshly with perpetrators of serious offences. The subsequent amendments to the Act included the granting of jurisdiction to the Regional court to pass life imprisonment, an automatic right of appeal against life imprisonment in respect of a juvenile accused and identification of circumstances that do not constitute substantial and compelling circumstances. Judicial discretion and departure from prescribed minimum sentences had initially presented a problem regarding its interpretation in a variety of cases in our courts. Eventually our courts came up with a clear interpretation of the meaning of the phrase substantial and compelling circumstances. This research project will analyze the provisions of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997 with regard to minimum sentences for certain serious offences. In the process case law and other literature will be discussed regarding the interpretation of minimum sentence provisions in the Act. Recommendations for legislation which will cover the aspect of sentencing on a wider scale are made.