LL.M. / Please refer to full text to view abstract

No abstract available / Jurisprudence / LL.M.

No abstract available / Jurisprudence / LL.M.

Thesis (LLM) -- Stellenbosch University, 2004. / Stellenbosch University. Faculty of Law. Dept. of Public Law. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: When evaluating a bail application, the court must take into consideration the interests of the accused against those of the community. The main goal of this assessment is to find a balance between said interests. While an application for bail is made at a stage where guilt has not been proven, it is of extreme importance that the court must not infringe on the fundamental rights of the accused which include the right to personal freedom and the presumption of innocence. In order to protect the rights of the bail applicant within the proper functioning of the legal system, it is important to determine the nature of bail proceedings. As shown in this thesis, bail proceedings are sui gelleris in nature, which means that a separate set of rules of the law of evidence is applicable to these proceedings. The object of this thesis is to identify the rules of law of evidence applicable to bail proceedings as well as to clarify the deviation from the normal rules of evidence which apply to the trial of the accused. In chapter one the purpose and nature of bail proceedings as well as the characteristics of accusatorial and inquisitorial systems, are discussed. Problem areas within the South African legal system with regards to bail applications are also highlighted in this chapter. In chapter two the application of the primary rules of the law of evidence with regards to bail proceedings are investigated as well as the admissibility of evidence pertaining to prior convictions of the applicant, opinion evidence and character evidence. In chapter three the admissibility of hearsay evidence at bail proceedings is discussed. The constitutionality of the privilege pertaining to the police docket is dealt with in chapter four. Chapter five deals with the infom1er's privilege. The requirements that have to be met in order to qualify for protection under the said privilege, are examined. Chapter six focuses on the privilege against self-incrimination and the manner In which it is applied in bail proceedings. The provisions of s 60(11B)(c) of the Criminal Procedure Act and the role of the presiding officer are also discussed in this chapter. Chapter seven focuses on the burden of proof in bail applications. Chapter eight contains a summary and recommendations. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: By die beoordeling van 'n borgaansoek moet die hof die be lange van die beskuldigde en die belange van die samelewing teen mekaar opweeg. Die doel van die betrokke verrigtinge is om 'n balans tussen hierdie belange te vind. Omdat borgtog ter sprake kom op 'n tydstip waar daar nog geen skuldigbevinding is nie, is dit van kardinale belang dat die hof ten aile tye moet waak teen die onregverdige inbreukmaking op die beskuldigde se fundamentele regte wat onder andere die reg op individuele vryheid en die vem10ede van onskuld insluit. Ten einde die regte van die borgaansoeker na behore te beskem1 sonder om die behoorlike funksionering van die regstelsel te belemmer, is dit belangrik om vas te stel wat die aard van borgverrigtinge is. Soos in hierdie tesis aangetoon word, is borgverrigtinge sui generis van aard. Dit het tot gevolg dat daar 'n aparte stel reels van die bewysreg bestaan wat op hierdie verrigtinge van toepassing is. In hierdie tesis word daar gepoog om die reels van die bewysreg wat op borgverrigtinge van toepassing is, te identifiseer en om die afwykings van die gewone bewysregreels wat op die verhoor van toepassing is, te verklaar. In hoofstuk een word die doel en aard van borgverrigtinge bespreek en word die kenmerke van die akkusatoriale en inkwisitoriale stelsels teen mekaar gestel. Die onduidelikhede oor die aard van borgverrigtinge in die Suid-Afrikaanse reg word ook aangeraak. In hoofstuk twee word die toepassing van die relevantheidsgrondreel by borgverrigtinge ondersoek, asook die toelaatbaarheid van getuienis oor die vorige veroordelings van die beskuldigde, opiniegetuienis en karaktergetuienis. Hoofstuk drie het betrekking op die toelaatbaarheid van hoorsegetuienis by borgverrigtinge. In hoofstuk vier word kwessies rakende dossierprivilegie behandel en die grondwetlikheid van sodanige privilegie, asook die toepassing daarvan, word van naderby beskou. In hoofstuk vyf word daar gefokus op die aanbrengersprivilegie. Die aard en toepassing van die privilegie asook die vereistes waaraan voldoen moet word alvorens daar op die betrokke privilegie gesteun kan word, word aangeraak. Hoofstuk ses fokus op die borgapplikant se privilegie teen selfinkriminasie. Die bepalings van a 60(11 B)(c) asook die rol van die voorsittende beampte word ook in hierdie hoofstuk aangespreek. Die sewende kwessie wat in verband met borgverrigtinge in die stu die ondersoek word, is die ligging van die bewyslas by sodanige verrigtinge. Dit word In hoofstuk sewe gedoen. Hoofstuk agt bevat 'n opsomming van sowel bevindings as aanbevelings.

The composite right to meaningful and informed participation in the criminal process comprises the right to information, the right to understand, the right to be prepared, the right to be present, the right to confrontation and the right to present one’s case. The sub-rights are not of an overarching nature such as the right to legal representation and the right of access to the law. The various rights are grouped together because they show some connection with the ability of the suspect or the accused to participate in the criminal proceedings as a legal subject, and not as an object of the proceedings as in primitive times. These rights ensure that the accused will not participate in the criminal process from an unfavourable position. The heading ‟meaningful and informed participation” is therefore a collective term for these rights. These sub-rights form part of the comprehensive right to a fair trial. The thesis examines aspects of the position of the accused in South Africa and in foreign jurisdictions such as the United States of America, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Germany, the United Kingdom and Islamic systems. International instruments such as the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and decisions of the United Nations Human Rights Committee are also considered. The thesis first considers the historical perspective of the accused in primitive times when he was regarded as an object of the criminal proceedings, to the present time when he is regarded as a subject of the proceedings. The study on foreign jurisdictions reveals that for the most part, our law is in line with the law of other countries. The study also demonstrates that the various rights are not absolute. In exceptional circumstances, some diminution of the accused’s rights is necessary to protect the interests of society. Nevertheless, the courts should act cautiously and not allow the exceptions to overtake the rule. The judiciary should strive to find a better balance between the constitutional rights of the accused and the interests of society. To this end, the judicial system must be objective yet vigilant. / Criminal & Procedural Law / LL.D.

The composite right to meaningful and informed participation in the criminal process comprises the right to information, the right to understand, the right to be prepared, the right to be present, the right to confrontation and the right to present one’s case. The sub-rights are not of an overarching nature such as the right to legal representation and the right of access to the law. The various rights are grouped together because they show some connection with the ability of the suspect or the accused to participate in the criminal proceedings as a legal subject, and not as an object of the proceedings as in primitive times. These rights ensure that the accused will not participate in the criminal process from an unfavourable position. The heading ‟meaningful and informed participation” is therefore a collective term for these rights. These sub-rights form part of the comprehensive right to a fair trial. The thesis examines aspects of the position of the accused in South Africa and in foreign jurisdictions such as the United States of America, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Germany, the United Kingdom and Islamic systems. International instruments such as the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and decisions of the United Nations Human Rights Committee are also considered. The thesis first considers the historical perspective of the accused in primitive times when he was regarded as an object of the criminal proceedings, to the present time when he is regarded as a subject of the proceedings. The study on foreign jurisdictions reveals that for the most part, our law is in line with the law of other countries. The study also demonstrates that the various rights are not absolute. In exceptional circumstances, some diminution of the accused’s rights is necessary to protect the interests of society. Nevertheless, the courts should act cautiously and not allow the exceptions to overtake the rule. The judiciary should strive to find a better balance between the constitutional rights of the accused and the interests of society. To this end, the judicial system must be objective yet vigilant. / Criminal and Procedural Law / LL.D.

Text in Afrikaans / Artikel 35(5) van die Grondwet 108 van 1996 handel oor die uitsluiting van ongrondwetlike getuienis en bepaal dat sodanige getuienis uitgesluit moet word indien toelating daarvan sal lei tot 'n onbillike verhoor of tot nadeel sal strek vir die regspleging. Uit die bewoording van die artikel blyk dit dat die howe geen diskresie het ten opsigte van die toelaatbaarheidsvraag nie en 'n streng uitsluitingbenadering moet volg. Die doel van hierdie verha• ndeling is om ondersoek in te stel na die mate van diskresie .en die wyse ·waarop diskresie toepas word in hierdie besluitnemingsproses. Twee benaderings is deur die howe gevolg, naamlik 'n benadering waar 'n wye diskresie uitgeoefen word en 'n benadering waar 'n beperkte diskresie uitgeoefen word, dus 'n gekwalifiseerde uitsluitingsbenadering. Die skrywer doen aan die hand dat beide gronde vir uitsluiting van belang is en dat die howe verkeie faktore moet oorweeg ten einde 'n beslissing te vel oor die insluiting of uitsluiting van ongrondwetlike getuienis. 'n Balans moet dus gehandhaaf word tussen die belang van die beskuldigde op 'n billike verhoor en die belang van die gemeenskap daarin dat regspleging nie benadeel moet word nie en dat reg en geregtigheid moet geskied / Section 35(3) of the Constitution Act 108 of 1996 deals with the exclusion of unconstitutionally obtained evidence and stipulates that such evidence must be excluded if the admission would render the trial unfair or be detrimental to the administration of justice. From the wording of the section it seems that the courts have no jurisdiction in regard to the admissibility question and that a strict exclusionary approach must be followed. The purpose of this dissertation is to investigate the amount of discretion that the Courts have, and the manner in which this discretion is applied in the process of decision making. Two approaches were followed by the courts namely a wide discretionary approach and an approach where a strict discretion was applied. It is submitted that botR grounds for exclusion are of importance and that the courts must consider a variety of factors in deciding the question on the inclusion or exclusion of unconstitutionally obtained evidence. A balance must be struck between the interest of the accused in a fair trial and the interest of the community that the administration of justice must not be prejudiced and that justice must prevail. / Criminal & Procedural Law / LL.M. (Law)

Text in Afrikaans / Artikel 35(5) van die Grondwet 108 van 1996 handel oor die uitsluiting van ongrondwetlike getuienis en bepaal dat sodanige getuienis uitgesluit moet word indien toelating daarvan sal lei tot 'n onbillike verhoor of tot nadeel sal strek vir die regspleging. Uit die bewoording van die artikel blyk dit dat die howe geen diskresie het ten opsigte van die toelaatbaarheidsvraag nie en 'n streng uitsluitingbenadering moet volg. Die doel van hierdie verha• ndeling is om ondersoek in te stel na die mate van diskresie .en die wyse ·waarop diskresie toepas word in hierdie besluitnemingsproses. Twee benaderings is deur die howe gevolg, naamlik 'n benadering waar 'n wye diskresie uitgeoefen word en 'n benadering waar 'n beperkte diskresie uitgeoefen word, dus 'n gekwalifiseerde uitsluitingsbenadering. Die skrywer doen aan die hand dat beide gronde vir uitsluiting van belang is en dat die howe verkeie faktore moet oorweeg ten einde 'n beslissing te vel oor die insluiting of uitsluiting van ongrondwetlike getuienis. 'n Balans moet dus gehandhaaf word tussen die belang van die beskuldigde op 'n billike verhoor en die belang van die gemeenskap daarin dat regspleging nie benadeel moet word nie en dat reg en geregtigheid moet geskied / Section 35(3) of the Constitution Act 108 of 1996 deals with the exclusion of unconstitutionally obtained evidence and stipulates that such evidence must be excluded if the admission would render the trial unfair or be detrimental to the administration of justice. From the wording of the section it seems that the courts have no jurisdiction in regard to the admissibility question and that a strict exclusionary approach must be followed. The purpose of this dissertation is to investigate the amount of discretion that the Courts have, and the manner in which this discretion is applied in the process of decision making. Two approaches were followed by the courts namely a wide discretionary approach and an approach where a strict discretion was applied. It is submitted that botR grounds for exclusion are of importance and that the courts must consider a variety of factors in deciding the question on the inclusion or exclusion of unconstitutionally obtained evidence. A balance must be struck between the interest of the accused in a fair trial and the interest of the community that the administration of justice must not be prejudiced and that justice must prevail. / Criminal and Procedural Law / LL.M. (Law)