The African National Congress (ANC) is engaged in an armed conflict with the South African Government for control of South Africa. ANC combatants are being prosecuted under South African criminal law as rebels, a process which undermines the normative value of the criminal law because it is in conflict with popular support for the ANC. International law provides a humanitarian alternative to the criminal law. This study investigates the international legal protections available to combatants in the conflict. Lawful combatant status and prisoner of war status would only be available if the South African armed conflict was classified as international. It has been argued that the international status of the ANC, derived from the denial of self-determination to the South African people, internationalises its war against the South African Government. Attempts have been made to enforce this concept. Article 1(4) of Geneva Protocol 1 classifies armed conflicts involving a movement representing a people with a right of se If-determination against a .. racist re,gime" as international. But South Africa did not accede to Protocol 1 and the argument that it is custom fails because of insufficient international support. Nevertheless, the developing situation justifies an examination of the personal conditions required to gain protectedstatus. The conditions in Article 4 of Geneva Convention 3 (1949) are onerous, making it impracticable in South Africa. Protocol l's updated conditions are more suited to the armed conflict. The Conventions and Protocol 1 also make available procedural and substantive protections to combatants and deal with special issues particular to South Africa. The South African armed conflict can alternatively be classified as non-international. Common Article 3 of the 1949 Conventions applies because South Africa is party to them. Geneva Protocol 2 is not .applicable because South Africa is not a party to it. Unfortunately, Article 3 only applies general humanitarian principles and not protected status. To conclude, because of the inadequate means for enforcing the classification of the South African armed conflict as international and the inadequacy of the protections available under the law of non-international armed conflict, it is urged that the Government confer ex-gratia. lawful status on ANC combatants. / Thesis(LL.M.)- University of Natal, Durban, 1988.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the sentencing practice of the military courts. Since an independent and impartial military judiciary is essential to ensure that justice is done a further aim of this study is to investigate whether the military courts are impartial, independent and affords the accused his fair trial rights. The sentences imposed by military courts are investigated and concerns regarding the imposition of these sentences are identified. Finally the appeal and review procedures followed by the military courts are investigated with specific reference to the military accused’s right appeal and review to a higher court as provided for by the Constitution. The sentencing phase of a trial forms an important part of the whole trial process. This is also true for military trials, yet no research has been done on military sentencing practice. Because of the potential influence of the draft Military Discipline Bill and the Law Reform Commission’s revision of the defence legislation on sentencing, research in this area is critical in the positive development of sentencing law in the military justice environment. An extensive literature study is undertaken to evaluate current military sentencing practices against civilian practices. The result of this study identifies certain concerns regarding the independence of the military courts, the treatment of military offenders and the appeal and review powers of the military reviewing authority. To a large extent it is also found that many concerns are based on the apparent rather than the existence of any real dangers to the independence of the military courts or the rights of the military accused. This thesis contributes to the accessibility of military law for a civilian audience, creating a platform for the development of future military sentences. / Jurisprudence / LLD

The purpose of this study is to investigate the sentencing practice of the military courts. Since an independent and impartial military judiciary is essential to ensure that justice is done a further aim of this study is to investigate whether the military courts are impartial, independent and affords the accused his fair trial rights. The sentences imposed by military courts are investigated and concerns regarding the imposition of these sentences are identified. Finally the appeal and review procedures followed by the military courts are investigated with specific reference to the military accused’s right appeal and review to a higher court as provided for by the Constitution. The sentencing phase of a trial forms an important part of the whole trial process. This is also true for military trials, yet no research has been done on military sentencing practice. Because of the potential influence of the draft Military Discipline Bill and the Law Reform Commission’s revision of the defence legislation on sentencing, research in this area is critical in the positive development of sentencing law in the military justice environment. An extensive literature study is undertaken to evaluate current military sentencing practices against civilian practices. The result of this study identifies certain concerns regarding the independence of the military courts, the treatment of military offenders and the appeal and review powers of the military reviewing authority. To a large extent it is also found that many concerns are based on the apparent rather than the existence of any real dangers to the independence of the military courts or the rights of the military accused. This thesis contributes to the accessibility of military law for a civilian audience, creating a platform for the development of future military sentences. / Jurisprudence / LL. D.

The dissertation examines the applicability of procedural fairness to actions by members of the South African National Defence Forces (SANDF). The research focuses on and uses the South African Defence Force Union v The Minister of South African National Defence Force (SANDU 2010 judgment) to illustrate how procedural fairness should find application in the SANDF, given the sui generis nature of the defence forces. This judgment presented an opportunity to investigate whether the legislative framework that is available in the SANDF is adequate to protect the right to procedural fairness of the members of the SANDF encapsulated in section 33 of the Constitution, 1996. The dissertation examines the relevant sections of the Defence Act, Military Discipline Supplementary Measures Act, Labour Relations Act (LRA), and the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act (PAJA) read with sections 23 and 33 of the Constitution to determine whether there is a gap that exists in so far as the protection of the right to procedural fairness of members of the defence forces is concerned. It also examines the Military Discipline Code and the rules and regulations of the Defence Forces. The analysis of the SANDU 2010 judgment demonstrates that PAJA could find application in dismissal or employment related disputes within the SANDF. The scenario that is evidenced from the analysis of the defence force legislative framework is that the legislative framework that is available within the SANDF is inadequate to protect and deal with disputes which arise from allegations of infringement of the right to procedural fairness. This scenario is compounded by the fact that the LRA which is the empowering legislation that was promulgated to give effect to the right to section 23 of the Constitution and to deal with dismissal and employment related disputes, does not apply to members of the SANDF. / Public, Constitutional, and International Law / LL. M.