The primary purpose of this paper is to indicate how Canadian legislative reforms could provide valuable insights regarding the reform of sexual assault law in South Africa. The first section of this paper contains an examination of three particular evidentiary rules in the South African context. In the second section a feminist critique of rape law is used to explore the significance of these rules in rape trials, using the framework of significant themes of the feminist enquiry. In the third section I look at the development of these evidentiary rules in Canada and evaluate the present legal position in this regard, with particular reference to decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in R v Seaboyer, R v Gayme (1991) 83 D.L.R. (4th) 193. In the final instance, an attempt is made to identify some significant lessons for those seeking to formulate the much needed reforms to these rules in South Africa.

The intention of this dissertation is to expose the gendered experiences of rape victims, based on the notion that while it should be the purpose of rape laws to protect victims of rape, in many circumstances the legal process results in disempowering experiences for victims, particularly women. Therefore, I suggest that the courtroom, a supposedly just space, is one which is laced with patriarchal undercurrents that work specifically against women. Rape is a complex and multi-faceted subject that is fast becoming an epidemic. In relation to HIV/AIDS and sexuality, the issue of rape certainly becomes compounded. Deconstructing the historical and cultural experiences of women is not only necessary in attempting to understand rape, but also the reasons why the justice system, which is dominantly a male domain, may still cling to patriarchal principles. One reason for the marginalization of rape victims may be the continued regard of women as second class citizens. The rape trial, in which Jacob Zuma was the alleged rapist, is a starting point, and by referring to this case, I intend to reveal and discuss weaknesses with regard to rape law within the South African context. / Thesis (M.A.)-University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, 2009.

No description available.

In this minithesis I conduct a critical discourse analysis to take on a double-pronged task. On the one hand I explore the social phenomenon of the contestation between supporters of then-ANC deputy president Jacob Zuma and supporters of his rape accuser. The trial, which took place in the Johannesburg High Court between mid-February and early May 2006, stirred intense public interest, both locally and internationally. The performance of thousands of Zuma’s supporters and a far smaller number of gender rights lobby groups, both of whom kept a presence outside the court building throughout the trial, received similar attention. Second, I examine how the Sowetan, a national daily tabloid with a black, middle-class readership, mediated the trial through pictures of the theatre outside the court and letters to the editor. The study is informed by post-Marxist and cultural studies perspectives, both approaches that are concerned with issues of power, ideology and the circulation of meaning within specific sociocultural contexts. A rudimentary thematic content analysis draws out some of the main themes from the material, while the critical discourse analysis is located within a theoretical framework based on concepts from Laclau & Mouffe’s theory of meaning, which assumes a power struggle between contesting positions seeking to invalidate one another and to either challenge or support existing hegemonies. This is further informed by, first, Laclau’s theorisation of populism, which assumes that diverse groupings can unite under a demagogue’s banner in shared antagonism towards existing power, and second, by concepts from Mamdani’s theorisation of power and resistance in colonial and post-colonial Africa, which explicates three overarching ideological discourses of human rights, social justice and traditional ethnic practices. The study, then, explores how these three discourses were operationalised by the localised contestations over the trial.