Department of Curriculum Studies and Education Management / MEd

Text in Afrikaans / Summaries in English and Afrikaans / Die Konstitusionele Hof het ir:i S v Makwanyane besluit dat die doodstraf nie versoenbaar is met die Grondwet nie en dit ongeldig verklaar. Die kritiek teenoor die regbank en die openbare mening oor die doodstraf was nog altyd s6 prominent dat die hof nie anders kon as om hieraan aandag te skenk nie. Die hof besluit dat die openbare mening nie 'n rol speel in die hersieningsproses nie. In hierdie verhandeling word die hof se standpunte en red es daarvoor ontleed. Ek kom tot die gevolgtrekking dat die hof korrek bes I is het. Die open bare mening is onseker. Daar is 'n verskil tussen die aard van die waardes in die Grondwet en die aard van die open bare mening. Die kritiek op die uitspraak is te wyte aan die gebrek aan insig en begrip onder lede van die gemeenskap oor die nuwe bestel en die rol van die regbank daarin. / The Constitutional Court in S v Makwanyane declared that the death penalty was inconsistent with the Constitution. The criticism on courts and the public opinion on the death penalty have been so severe that the court could not have but considered these issues. The court concluded that public opinion is not relevant in constitutional review. In this dissertation, I analyze the court's viewpoints and the reasons therefor. My conclusion is that the court made the correct decision. The public opinion is uncertain, and differs from values. The judgment is criticised due to a lack of understanding amongst the public as to the meaning of the new dispensation and the role of our courts therein. / Law / Thesis (LL.M.)--Universiteit van Suid-Afrika, 1996.

Text in Afrikaans / Summaries in English and Afrikaans / Die Konstitusionele Hof het ir:i S v Makwanyane besluit dat die doodstraf nie versoenbaar is met die Grondwet nie en dit ongeldig verklaar. Die kritiek teenoor die regbank en die openbare mening oor die doodstraf was nog altyd s6 prominent dat die hof nie anders kon as om hieraan aandag te skenk nie. Die hof besluit dat die openbare mening nie 'n rol speel in die hersieningsproses nie. In hierdie verhandeling word die hof se standpunte en red es daarvoor ontleed. Ek kom tot die gevolgtrekking dat die hof korrek bes I is het. Die open bare mening is onseker. Daar is 'n verskil tussen die aard van die waardes in die Grondwet en die aard van die open bare mening. Die kritiek op die uitspraak is te wyte aan die gebrek aan insig en begrip onder lede van die gemeenskap oor die nuwe bestel en die rol van die regbank daarin. / The Constitutional Court in S v Makwanyane declared that the death penalty was inconsistent with the Constitution. The criticism on courts and the public opinion on the death penalty have been so severe that the court could not have but considered these issues. The court concluded that public opinion is not relevant in constitutional review. In this dissertation, I analyze the court's viewpoints and the reasons therefor. My conclusion is that the court made the correct decision. The public opinion is uncertain, and differs from values. The judgment is criticised due to a lack of understanding amongst the public as to the meaning of the new dispensation and the role of our courts therein. / Law / Thesis (LL.M.)--Universiteit van Suid-Afrika, 1996.

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

The Criminal Law Amendment Act introduced a scheme where minimum sentences are prescribed for serious offences into the South African Criminal Law. The limitations put on the courts’ sentencing discretion were not received with unanimous approval from all quarters. The Constitutional Court declared the general working of the Act to be constitutional soon after its inception. Specific provisions pertaining to certain offences remained unpopular. The hefty sentence of 15 years imprisonment prescribed for the possession of a semi-automatic firearm is put forward as an example in this regard. High Courts avoid the minimum sentence prescribed for this offence by using different interpretational methods. Despite the sense of animosity towards the unfair contents of this provision, no ruling is made on the constitutionality thereof. An apparent deference towards the legislature could be detected on the part of the judiciary. South African jurisprudence discourages our courts to rule on the constitutionality of a law. It is only done when the defect could not be remedied by any other available means. The reluctance of our courts to make a ruling on the constitutionality of the semi-automatic provision does not promote legal certainty. High Courts attach different interpretations to the “true intention” of the legislature in order to bypass this provision. Logic dictates that inexperienced presiding officers with inferior interpretational skills would continue to hand down the minimum sentence while it remains on the law books. A sentence of fifteen years is also prescribed for robbery with aggravating circumstances. The existing common law on the interpretation of the definition of this offence provides for a wide range of human conduct to be included. Case law could be expected where the courts deviate from the prescribed sentence on a regular basis. This unscientific approach should be discouraged and a rethinking of the boundaries of this offence is suggested. The Act is doing more harm than good to our Criminal Law. The legislature could still provide other visible measures against serious crime without invading the sentencing discretion of the judiciary.

Please read the abstract in the section 00front of this document / Thesis (DPhil (Social Work))--University of Pretoria, 2005. / Social Work and Criminology / unrestricted

While some research has been done on the use of corporal punishment in South African schools, there is a dearth of research on other forms of punishment and little has been done to research the meaning of punishment. This study explores the meaning of punishment in a high school context and focuses on the different attitudes of parents, teachers and pupils, with a view to identifying, in particular, how they justify the use of punishment. A sample of 50 pupils, 30 teachers and 30 parents were selected for the study. Focus groups and a questionnaire with closed and open-ended questions were used to collect the data. The questionnaire was constructed to explore themes which emerged in the focus group discussions . Results were grouped into themes and arranged by tables , and the Chi-square test of statistical significance was used to analyze some of the data. The results show that the meaning and the approach to punishment is differently construed by participants. Parents construe punishment as an educative instrument and a disciplinary measure used for the good of pupils and the society. Teachers see it as a discip1inary measure, a strategy used for effective learning, and a negative stimulus used to inflict pain towards the goal of an orderly school environment. To pupils the punishment scene provides an opportunity for what they perceive as sadistic enjoyment and as something negative which is used by teachers to vent their own frustrations. Participants agree that clear, consensually agreed upon rules should be set to regulate school behaviour and that there should be clear and consensually agreed upon ways of ensuring that these rules are adhered to; and constructive ways of dealing with violation of these rules. The central concern seems to be to move away from a retributive, punitive mode of thinking about punishment, towards a purposeful one. The implications of the research findings are discussed in the context of existing literature in the area and in relation to policy development.

This thesis examines why courts in the United States of America (US), India and South Africa refer to foreign law in death penalty cases. To gain an understanding of what drives the apex courts of the US, India and South Africa to cite foreign law when considering domestic death penalty issues, this thesis proposes a three-part matrix to both assess the relevant case law and to analyse the academic literature on cross-citation. Firstly, it will be demonstrated that judges in national courts cross-cite comparative law out of a primary interest in constitutional interpretation. Cross-citation is used in this manner to assist judges in their domestic interpretative tasks. Secondly, it will be illustrated how courts that engage in the citation of foreign law also seek guidance from other jurisdictions as to the content of shared values, such as what type of punishment does not fundamentally and unlawfully violate the right to human dignity. Finally, this thesis assesses to what degree courts from the three selected jurisdictions are additionally referencing or applying a customary international law norm when citing foreign sources. The argument is made that the domestic courts under examination engage with comparative law in the context of a broader transnational normative project, taking the international human rights framework that developed after the Second World War as a key reference point. In doing so, this thesis argues that these courts are at times recognising and developing emerging customary norms, and at other times giving effect to and enforcing applicable international human rights law.

MPM / Oliver Tambo Institute of Governance and Policy Studies

Penology / (M.A. (Penology)