Historically South African law has been dominated by Western law. Indigenous law and the jural postulates which underpin that law are insufficiently accommodated in the South African legal order. The Western component of the official legal system is regarded as institutionally and politically superior and is as such perceived to be the dominant system. In contrast indigenous law is regarded as a servient system. The monopolistic control of the legal order by the Western section of the population resulted in the creation of a legal order primarily suited to its own needs. The fact that few of the values of indigenous law are reflected in the official legal system and the fact that there is a measure of conflict and tension between the fundamental precepts of indigenous law and those of Western law, gave rise to a crisis of legitimacy of the official legal system in South Africa. This in turn lead to the emergence of unofficial alternative structures for the administration of justice. Indigenous law should receive full recognition and enjoy the same status as Western law. To accomplish this, legislative measures which entrench a distorted indigenous law, limit the application of indigenous law, or affect its status in the South African legal order, should be revoked. Even in a multicultural society such as that of South Africa, there is a common nucleus of core values that are shared by the whole society. But different cultures have different conceptions of these basic values and their role in legal, political and social ordering. The Bill of Rights should give due recognition to the postulates which underscore both Western and indigenous law. This should be done by providing that the values the Bill entrenches, must be interpreted in their proper cultural perspective where circumstances so demand. But this will be possible only if the level of knowledge of indigenous law and its fundamental precepts is drastically improved. / LL.D

Historically South African law has been dominated by Western law. Indigenous law and the jural postulates which underpin that law are insufficiently accommodated in the South African legal order. The Western component of the official legal system is regarded as institutionally and politically superior and is as such perceived to be the dominant system. In contrast indigenous law is regarded as a servient system. The monopolistic control of the legal order by the Western section of the population resulted in the creation of a legal order primarily suited to its own needs. The fact that few of the values of indigenous law are reflected in the official legal system and the fact that there is a measure of conflict and tension between the fundamental precepts of indigenous law and those of Western law, gave rise to a crisis of legitimacy of the official legal system in South Africa. This in turn lead to the emergence of unofficial alternative structures for the administration of justice. Indigenous law should receive full recognition and enjoy the same status as Western law. To accomplish this, legislative measures which entrench a distorted indigenous law, limit the application of indigenous law, or affect its status in the South African legal order, should be revoked. Even in a multicultural society such as that of South Africa, there is a common nucleus of core values that are shared by the whole society. But different cultures have different conceptions of these basic values and their role in legal, political and social ordering. The Bill of Rights should give due recognition to the postulates which underscore both Western and indigenous law. This should be done by providing that the values the Bill entrenches, must be interpreted in their proper cultural perspective where circumstances so demand. But this will be possible only if the level of knowledge of indigenous law and its fundamental precepts is drastically improved. / LL.D

The issue of the vertical /or horizontal operation of the Bill of Rights (chapter 3) is a controversial one. The interim constitution deals with this controversy in a subtle way by avoiding direct horizontal operation of Chapter 3. Instead, it provides for the so-called 'seepage to horizontal relationships' in terms of section35{3). This apparently was a political compromise between the pro-vertical only and the pro-horizontal groups. The human rights history of this country justifies a Bill of Rights that would have both vertical and horizontal operation. However, in section 35 (3) there is potential for the values enshrined in the constitution and Chapter 3, and the spirit hereof, to permeate and filter through the entire legal system in all it's applications. It would seem, however, as demonstrated by the decision in De Klerk v Du Plessis, that the extent to which this filtering process will benefit individuals in their private relations, will depend on the interpretation given to section 35 (3) by the courts. If courts, as it happend in De Klerk's case fail to realise the full import of section 35 ( 3) aspects of the existing law which are unjust could remain and the process of creating a just, open and democratic society will be hampered. / Constitutional, International & Indigenous Law / LL.M.

The dissertation consists of an analysis of the Constitutional Court decision S v Mhlungu 1995(7) BCLR 793 CC. The analysis focuses on the significance of the different interpretative approaches adopted by the members of the Court in analysing section 241(8) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Afii.ca Act 200 of 1993. The theoretical approaches to constitutional interpretation are first briefly discussed. This is followed by a description of the four respective judgments in the decision. The case is then analysed in respect of section 3 5, Chapter 3 and the Constitution itself in order to determine the significance. The jurisprudence of the Court (developed in its first eight decisions) is evaluated to assess the approach of the Constitutional Court to Chapter 3 and the remainder of the Constitution respectively. The conclusion is reached that the Court has endorsed a generous/purposive approach to constitutional interpretation and that this extends to the entire text of the Constitution. / Law / LL.M.

The issue of the vertical /or horizontal operation of the Bill of Rights (chapter 3) is a controversial one. The interim constitution deals with this controversy in a subtle way by avoiding direct horizontal operation of Chapter 3. Instead, it provides for the so-called 'seepage to horizontal relationships' in terms of section35{3). This apparently was a political compromise between the pro-vertical only and the pro-horizontal groups. The human rights history of this country justifies a Bill of Rights that would have both vertical and horizontal operation. However, in section 35 (3) there is potential for the values enshrined in the constitution and Chapter 3, and the spirit hereof, to permeate and filter through the entire legal system in all it's applications. It would seem, however, as demonstrated by the decision in De Klerk v Du Plessis, that the extent to which this filtering process will benefit individuals in their private relations, will depend on the interpretation given to section 35 (3) by the courts. If courts, as it happend in De Klerk's case fail to realise the full import of section 35 ( 3) aspects of the existing law which are unjust could remain and the process of creating a just, open and democratic society will be hampered. / Constitutional, International and Indigenous Law / LL.M.

The dissertation consists of an analysis of the Constitutional Court decision S v Mhlungu 1995(7) BCLR 793 CC. The analysis focuses on the significance of the different interpretative approaches adopted by the members of the Court in analysing section 241(8) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Afii.ca Act 200 of 1993. The theoretical approaches to constitutional interpretation are first briefly discussed. This is followed by a description of the four respective judgments in the decision. The case is then analysed in respect of section 3 5, Chapter 3 and the Constitution itself in order to determine the significance. The jurisprudence of the Court (developed in its first eight decisions) is evaluated to assess the approach of the Constitutional Court to Chapter 3 and the remainder of the Constitution respectively. The conclusion is reached that the Court has endorsed a generous/purposive approach to constitutional interpretation and that this extends to the entire text of the Constitution. / Law / LL.M.

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 / 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.

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)

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.