Thesis (LLM)--Stellenbosch University, 2013. / Bibliography / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Plea bargaining describes the act of negotiating and concluding agreements in the criminal procedure. Usually the prosecutor and the accused agree that the accused will plead guilty to the charge brought against him in exchange for some concession from the prosecution. The bargain is not limited to the presented subject. Agreements can contain the non-prosecution or reduction of charges, specific terms of punishment, conditions of probation and much more. In many countries the vast majority of criminal cases are disposed by way of bargaining. Plea bargaining breaches with the concept of a conventional trial and consequently clashes with well-known fundamental principles of the criminal procedure. Moreover, bargaining before criminal trials strongly implicates the constitutionally secured rights of the accused as well as of the public interest. Although plea bargaining is broadly criticized for its implications on essential rules and principles, the use of the practice is widespread. There are clear benefits to the participant, such as to avoid a lengthy trial with an uncertain outcome. South Africa, as a legal system with roots in the common law, adopted the procedure in 2001 with the implementation of s 105A into the Criminal Procedure Act. The German legislature in 2009 decided to regulate what until then had been informal practice by inserting several rules into the German criminal procedure, amongst which s 257c contains the main provisions. The implementation of bargains into the German law has produced tensions particularly due to the inquisitorial basis of the criminal procedure that stands in civil law tradition. This thesis evaluates how South African and German provisions on plea bargaining differ, i.e., on which different backgrounds they are based on, how the bargain procedures are construed and to what extent statutory plea bargaining in both legal systems displaces informal traditional agreements. The comparison is enriching under the aspect that both countries implemented the bargain procedure but had to place them on fundamentally different grounds. Having presented the grounds that motivated the research (Chapter I.), the origins of plea bargaining in general as well as the legal development toward the present statutory provisions in both countries are examined (Chapter II.). The bargain procedures are compared in detail (Chapter IV.). A large part focuses on particular problem areas and how both legal systems cope with them (Chapter V.). The result of the research is summarized in a conclusion (Chapter VI.). / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Pleitonderhandeling kan beskryf word as die proses van onderhandel en die aangaan van ooreenkomste in die strafproses. Die vervolging en die verdediging sal gewoonlik ooreenkom dat die beskuldigde skuldig sal pleit in ruil vir een of meer toegewings deur die vervolging. Ooreenkomste kan insluit die nie-vervolging of vermindering van klagte, spesifieke aspekte van vonnis, voorwaardes van parool en talle meer. In ‘n hele aantal lande word die oorgrote meerderheid van sake afgehandel by wyse van pleitooreenkomste. Dit is egter duidelik dat pleitooreenkomste in konflik is met die konsep van ‘n gewone verhoor en is gevolglik ook in konflik met van die grondbeginsels van die strafprosesreg. Dit raak ook die grondwetlike regte van beskuldigdes en die belange van die samelewing. Ten spyte van hierdie kritiek en meer, is die praktyk van pleitonderhandeling wydverspreid. Daar blyk besliste voordeel te wees vir die deelnemende partye, byvoorbeeld die vermyding van lang verhore met onsekere beslissings. Suid-Afrika (met ‘n sterk gemeenregtelike tradisie) het die praktyk van pleitonderhandeling formeel en per statuut in 2001 aanvaar, met die aanvaarding en invoeging van artikel 105A in die Strafproseswet, 1977. Die wetgewer in Duitsland het in 2009 besluit om die informele praktyk van pleitonderhandeling te formaliseer met die invoeging van sekere bepalings in die Duitse strafproseskode. Hierdie invoeging het sekere spanning veroorsaak in die Duitse strafproses, veral weens die inkwisitoriese tradisie in daardie jurisdiksie. Hierdie tesis evalueer die Suid-Afrikaanse en Duitse benaderings tot pleitonderhandelinge, hoe dit verskil, die verskillende regskulturele kontekste waarbinne dit plaasvind, en die mate waartoe pleitonderhandeling in beide sisteme informele ooreenkomste vervang het. Die vergelykende ondersoek bevind dat beide stelsels die pleitooreenkoms ingestel het, maar dit moes doen mvn fundamenteel verskillende gronde. Hoofstuk I (die motivering vir die studie), word gevolg deur ‘n historiese ondersoek (Hoofstuk II). Die verdere hoofstukke fokus op die regsvergelykende aspekte en die gevolgtrekkings word in Hoofstuk VI uiteengesit.

Due to the party-orientation and professional nature of the adversary mode of criminal procedure, the principles of a fair trial are best observed where the accused is represented by a lawyer. Given the advantages to be gained from legal representation, the principle of equal justice requires that all accused should have access to legal assistance and thus that legal aid should be provided for indigent accused. The South African legal aid scheme cannot yet provide assistance to all indigent accused because of the large number of these accused, the shortage of manpower and the lack of funds. There are, however, few legislative provisions to safeguard the rights of the vast majority of accused, arraigned in the lower courts, who remain undefended. The Supreme Court, in order to ensure that these accused are fairly tried, has imposed the following types of duties on judicial officers: (a) a duty to facilitate the accused's participation in the proceedings by advising him of his rights and duties and assisting him in their exercise; (b) a duty to control the prosecutor in the exercise of his powers; and (c) a duty to conduct an enquiry before arriving at administrative-type decisions. These duties are, however, inadequate to achieve the Court's, objective because, firstly, not all, rights are made accessible to the accused, and secondly, the duties are inadequate to ensure that the accused's guilt is reliably established. The failure of the legislature and the Supreme Court to incorporate the principle of equal justice into the legal process, has resulted in court proceedings that are characterized by unjust practices and outcomes. To ensure the more equitable prosecution of undefended accused it is suggested that an activist judicial officer should be responsible for the enforcement of all the principles of a fair trial (which would be concretized in clear legal rules) in an impartial manner, with his decisionmaking routinely supervised by the Supreme Court. / Thesis (LL.D.)-University of Natal, Durban, 1986.

The Criminal Law (Forensic Procedures) Amendment Act 37 of 2013 came into operation in January 2015. The Act makes provision for the establishment of a National Forensic DNA Database, which will store DNA profiles of certain groups of people. This research will discuss the establishment of a forensic DNA database in South Africa. The legal position in the United States of America will also be considered, with specific reference to the states of Maryland, California and New York. This research will focus predominantly on the collection of DNA samples and profiles from arrestees. When such samples are allowed to be collected, what offences warrant the collection of such samples and the period within which the DNA samples need to be destroyed. Collecting DNA samples and profiles from certain persons could potentially violate particular rights in the Bill of Rights. The rights to privacy, bodily integrity, equality and human dignity are discussed as well as the approach the courts have adopted in dealing with such infringements or possible infringements. This research furthermore deals with the historical developments of DNA evidence and contains a brief discussion on expert evidence. This research also deals with the evidential value of DNA evidence, as well as possible problems faced by prosecutors and defence attorneys when dealing with DNA evidence. The Criminal Law (Forensic Procedures) Amendment Act is still very new, and therefore, there is not yet much case law in South Africa specifically dealing with the sections of the said Act. This research makes submissions and recommendations regarding certain sections of the Act, as well as the overall constitutionality of the Act.

In this project the adoption of an inquisitorial model of criminal procedure in court proceedings relating to children is discussed. The traditional characteristics of adversarial and inquisitorial models of criminal procedure, the two models in a South African perspective and problems with the adversarial model are highlighted. That it terrifies and silence young victim and witnesses from giving evidence. The inquisitorial elements present in South African criminal procedure such as in bail proceedings, plea proceedings, powers of the presiding officer to call, recall and examine witnesses, powers of the presiding officer to exclude inadmissible evidence, evidence on sentence, and investigation on unreasonable delay on trials are discussed. The international instruments pertaining to children in conflict with the law and child witnesses are examined, together with their impact in our laws relating to children. The constitutional implications to the rights of children are discussed. The historical background that culminated to the Child Justice Act is highlighted. The Child Justice Act with particular reference to the inquisitorial aspects present in this Act is discussed. The measures that aim to protect child witness present in the Criminal Procedure Act, Criminal law Sexual offences and Related Matters Amendment Act and Children’s Act are highlighted. The conclusion, on the analysis of protective measures protecting children, is that in South African law there is a renewed interest in inquisitorial procedures as an effective means of ensuring justice. The conclusion suggests that adversarial model of criminal procedure is not the best method for our legal system to deal with children.

No Abstract available / Jurisprudence / L.LD.

Penology / (M.A. (Penology)

Quantified decision-making refers to the scaling of factors such as crime seriousness, risk assessment, violation severity, and punitive responses or intensity of surveillance. As such, it is largely based on the justice principle, according to which the punitive response should be commensurate with the crime committed. This study consequently looks at the applicability of a retributive stance towards probation, and suggests a quantified, or structured, approach to decision-making in probation with special reference to the South African situation. Referring to historical and ideological precedents, it is maintained that the current crisis in corrections - referring to the congestion of prison facilities and the negative spin-offs related to it - can, to a large extent, be ascribed to an over reliance on imprisonment as a sentencing option. It is argued that imprisonment can be seen as a failure in terms of both its basic motives, and more importantly, with regard to its unintended consequences, necessitating a search for viable sentencing alternatives. With regard to probation, and Intensive Supervision Probation (ISP) in particular, this study recognizes its limitations, but maintains that probation still holds the greatest potential as a workable alternative to incarceration. In view of South African corrections, that is plagued by prison overcrowding, on the one hand, and certain structural shortcomings, on the other, a structured probation system is proposed that will evade the weaknesses of subjective decisionmaking, which often act to intensify the crisis. It is proposed that quantified decision-making tools be developed that will replace both sentencing and revocation decisions. It is further suggested that an effective risk prediction instrument be developed to guide the probation process. / Penology / D. Litt. et Phil.

This study analyses judicial approaches to sentencing offenders under the age of 18 convicted of serious crimes and their adult counterparts. It traces sentencing patterns, trends and shifts from 1950 to 2009 with reference to key moments. The study seeks to identify factors that determine the choice of sentence. Indeed, competing penal theories appear to be behind judicial decisions. In this regard it is claimed that although it is difficult to identify the extent of factors considered in sentencing decisions, seriousness of crime seems to carry more weight than the prior record and age factor in the selection of a sentence. The study applied both quantitative and qualitative methodologies, using primary or historical and secondary sources of data collection. This involved studying real court cases, the observation of trials and interviews with Wynberg regional court magistrates, Mitchells Plain regional court magistrates and Cape High Court Judges as part of primary-historical data collected. Penal statistics and data gathered included law reports, penological literature was analysed and computerised, and philosophical interpretation of findings was used. The study concludes that sentencing approaches are still marked by inconsistency and vagueness, which require to be improved by ongoing assessment within the courts in pursuit of balanced sentencing that meets various goals. It is pointed out that there are variations between the courts, and among different regional magistrates and judges, which require to be justified in the light of the divergences in crime seriousness and offenders alike. The study claims that sentencing is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon, involving history, law and sociology. It further recommends that persons under the age of 18 convicted of serious crime should be accorded less culpability compared to adults with regard to sentence severity. / Criminology / D. Litt. et Phil. (Penology)

The goal of this research was to determine the procedures used for conducting a search and seizure in a tax-related offence in terms of the Criminal Procedure Act, Act 51 of 1977. Aspects that cause problems for the South African Revenue Service (SARS) investigators are the application for a search warrant and the activities that take place before, during and after the search and seizure. An introduction, definition and explanation are given of certain key concepts such as forensic and criminal investigations, as well as their objectives and purpose. The various search methods are also discussed and explained as are the chain of custody and evidence in general. A large part of this research deals with the legal requirements for a search and seizure in a tax-related offence and encompasses issues such as the procedures for obtaining a search warrant, pre-raid briefing, conducting the search, and the seizing of, marking, storage and disposal of documents. The findings of the research are discussed and recommendations subsequently made regarding the shortcomings identified. The findings that were made related to the process and procedure to obtain a search warrant, the actual execution of a search and seizure and the legislation that authorises searches and seizures in taxrelated offences. Further findings were made in respect of the mandate of SARS criminal investigators to investigate, the admissibility of evidence obtained from a search and seizure and the marking, recording, storage and disposal of seized items. Recommendations were made regarding training, improved communication and skills transfer to address the shortcomings identified. / Police Practice / (M.Tech. (Forensic investigation))

In the light of a more punitive stance in Corrections and public discontent with the criminal justice system, a number of studies have been conducted since 1970 testing public punitiveness, probably in an attempt to determine whether sentences laid down by courts are in line with public perceptions on just deserts. This study combines two scales: The first a Likert scale measuring punitiveness as such and the second a "Just Deserts" scale testing public reactions in terms of imprisonment for crime descriptions. By using Pearson's correlation, no positive correlation could be established between these two scales. Profiles of the top and bottom 15% scorers on both scales showed that the scales were, if anything, negatively related. This information is informative in the sense that opinion polls showing public discontentment with sentencing cannot be seen as a true reflection of their reactions to more descriptive cases. / Penology / M.A. (Penology)