Thesis (LLM)--Stellenbosch University, 2002. / Some digitised pages may appear illegible due to the condition of the original hard copy / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This thesis is a response to the judgment of the Constitutional Court in South
African Personal Injury Lawyers v Heath, in which certain provisions of the
Special Investigating Units and Special Tribunals Act were subjected to
constitutional review. The outcome of the case was the striking down of certain
provisions of the Act as unconstitutional, and the removal of Judge Willem Heath
from his position as head of the Unit. The provisions were said to infringe upon the
principle of separation of powers, an implicit term of the Constitution of South
Africa. This principle affects the extent of the judicial power because of its
influence on determining the acceptability of extra-judicial functions. The doctrine
of separation of powers is therefore considered in its historical and theoretical
context, with particular reference to the way in which it tends to limit or define the
role of judges. Following this analysis, the status of institutions supporting
constitutional democracy is examined, and the legislation governing Special
Investigating Units is compared with that which regulates the office of the Public
Protector. As a result, some alternative legislative means of achieving the ends of
the Units, namely the combating of state corruption and maladministration, are
suggested. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Hierdie tesis volg op die uitspraak van die Grondwetlike Hof in South African
Personal Injury Lawyers v Heath, waarin sekere bepalings van die Wet op Spesiale
Ondersoekeenhede en Spesiale Tribunale aan grondwetlike hersiening onderwerp
is. Die uitkoms van die saak was dat sekere ongrondwetlike bepalings van die Wet
ongeldig verklaar is, en dat Regter Willem Heath van sy posisie as hoof van die
Eenheid onthef is. Dit is bevind dat die bepalings die beginsel van skeiding van
magte, 'n implisiete term van die Suid-Afrikaanse Grondwet, geskend het. As
gevolg van sy invloed op die bepaling van aanvaarbaarheid van buite-juridiese
funksies, beïnvloed dié beginsel die omvang van die juridiese mag. Die skeiding
van magte leerstuk word dus in sy historiese en teoretiese konteks oorweeg, met
spesifieke verwysing na die manier waarop dit neig om die rol van regters te beperk
of te omskryf. Na hierdie analise word die status ondersoek van instellings wat
grondwetlike demokrasie ondersteun, en die wetgewing wat die Spesiale
Ondersoekeenhede beheer, vergelyk met dié wat die Openbare Beskermer reguleer.
Op grond hiervan word sekere alternatiewe wetgewende metodes voorgestelom die
doeleindes van die Eenhede, naamlik die bekamping van staatskorrupsie en
wanadministrasie, te bereik.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:sun/oai:scholar.sun.ac.za:10019.1/53119 |
| Date | 03 1900 |
| Creators | Shackleford, Caroline Sara |
| Contributors | Du Plessis, L. M., Stellenbosch University. Faculty of Law. Department of Public Law. |
| Publisher | Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | en_ZA |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis |
| Format | v, 88 pages |
| Rights | Stellenbosch University |
Page generated in 0.0072 seconds