The South African Constitution in section 27(1)(c) obligates the state to develop a comprehensive social security system. It affirms the universal right to access to social security, including appropriate social assistance for those unable to support themselves and their dependants. It orders the state to take reasonable legislative and other measures, within its available resources, to achieve the progressive realisation of these rights. The underlying normative commitment of social security is the improvement of the quality of life of the population by promoting economic or material equality. Social security ensures that all citizens have a stake in society and that each individual has an incentive to contribute to the development of the commonwealth. It plays a crucial role in the lives of communities and families viewed in the context of social transfers which provide broader development objectives and tackles income poverty transfers. The objectives of this study are threefold. Firstly, it examines the extension of social assistance coverage to the indigents in South Africa. Secondly, it looks at the legal mechanisms employed by courts and government in order to improve the social security rights of the poor in South Africa. Thirdly, the research investigates the possible reform and trends in India and Brazil with the aim of improving South Africa’s system of social security. For the avoidance of doubt, the law evaluated in this work is at 15 September 2015. / Jurisprudence / LL. D.

This research examines the legal issues surrounding killing in defence of property in three selected jurisdictions: South Africa, Cameroon and the United States. The comparative analysis illustrates that although the right to protect one’s property is universal, this defence is interpreted differently in the various jurisdictions. Another issue considered in the study is the constitutional right to life in each jurisdiction and whether or not an unlawful attack against one’s property creates a legal entitlement for the attacked party to take the life of another in defence of his or her property. Private defence of property is available when a person uses force to defend an interest in property, for example; to prevent a would-be thief from taking his own, or another’s property, to prevent someone from damaging his own or another’s property, to prevent an intruder from entering his own or another’s property. When an accused pleads private defence, his claim is that his harm-causing conduct was, in the circumstances, lawful. The reasonable use of force (short of deadly force) in the private defence of property is not disputed. However, the use of deadly force in protection of property is controversial, especially in a constitutional state such as South Africa where life should be prized above property. One should however also consider that there is a close link between the private defence of defending life and of protecting property. In many cases, an assault on property also involves a threat on life. However, there are cases of private defence of property where no threat to bodily integrity exists. These situations will be examined in all three jurisdictions and measured against the various constitutional imperatives. Conclusions and recommendations are made as regards the legal framework on the defence of property in the criminal law of the various jurisdictions. / Criminal and Procedural Law / LL. M.