scholarly journals SOUTH AFRICAN NATIONAL DEFENCE FORCE (SANDF) DROPS CHARGES AGAINST HIJAB-WEARING OFFICER: CASE IN POINT SOUTH AFRICA

2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 195-206
Author(s):  
Ashraf Booley

Over the last few decades, a piece of fabric has become a powerful and divisive symbol worldwide. Since the tragic events of 9/11, this piece of fabric has become a topic of great debate, at local, national, regional and international level. The veil as worn by some Muslim women has assumed iconic proportions around the globe. To some it symbolizes piety to others, oppression. To some it is a rejection of Western morality to others, a rejection of modernity. To some, it is a religious statement supporting Islam as a way of living; to others, a political statement supporting violent Islamists. These disparate attributions exemplify the power of nonverbal communication and support the maxim that words and objects contain no inherent meaning; only people assigned meaning. This article discusses the status of religious rights and freedoms under the South African Constitution. One aspect of this change is the change that has affected the various religions, cultures, and customs in South Africa. It is therefore, viewed by many as a constitution for the people of South Africa which includes a Bill of Rights. Historically speaking, for the very first time since colonialism, all religions were guaranteed the of religion. Furthermore, religions, cultures and languages are deep-rooted in the various constitutional provisions, namely, sections 9(3), 15(1) to (3), 30, 31, 185 and 234 respectively. These constitutional provisions are solidified by section 7 which obliges the state to respect, protect, promote and fulfil the provisions set forth in the Bill of Rights. The article concludes with an argument for the recognition of plurality of religions and religious legal systems in South Africa.

Author(s):  
M K Ingle

The Bill of Rights contained within South Africa’s Constitution features a number of ‘socio- economic rights’. Although these rights are justiciable they are subject to various limitations. They generally entail a positive onus on the part of the state to provide some good – not immediately, but ‘progressively’. Women have a direct interest in the realization of these rights and, where given effect to, they should exert a positive developmental impact. Some authorities are, however, of the opinion that socio-economic rights are not really enforceable. This article contends that the provision of social goods, by the state, should be the concomitant of the disciplined implementation of policy. Delivery should not therefore be contingent upon the legalistic vagaries of the human rights environment.Keywords: Socio-economic rights; justiciability; Bill of Rights; development; South African Constitution; womenDisciplines: Development Studies;Human Rights; Gender Studies; Political Science


2020 ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
John C Mubangizi

Abstract The South African Constitution, particularly its Bill of Rights, is regarded as one of the most progressive in the world. The Ugandan Constitution, adopted around the same time as its South African counterpart, also has a Bill of Rights. Lawyers and advocacy groups in both countries have taken advantage of their constitutions to challenge the government to enforce several rights ranging from health care services, education, water and sanitation, to housing and social security, albeit at a lower scale and with less impact and significance in Uganda than South Africa. The purpose of this paper is to discuss and determine the constitutional impact of strategic litigation in South Africa and Uganda. The paper begins with a conceptual context of strategic litigation. The specific reasons for the choice of the two countries are highlighted before focusing, in a comparative way, on some relevant organizations and the various court decisions that have emanated from strategic litigation in both countries. The paper identifies similarities and differences between Ugandan and South African approaches to strategic litigation. Conclusions are then made after highlighting the comparative lessons that both countries can learn from each other, but also what other African states can learn from these two countries’ experiences.


2000 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-71
Author(s):  
Joan Small ◽  
Evadne Grant

Equality occupies the first place in most written constitutions, but in South Africa, its importance is magnified both in terms of the text of the Constitution and in terms of the context in which that Constitution operates. The Bill of Rights is expected, in South Africa, to help bring about the transformation of the society. These expectations of transformation through the operation of the Bill of Rights are informing the development of the law in relation to equality and non-discrimination by the Constitutional Court. The concept of discrimination is uniquely defined in the South African Bill of Rights. The Courts are struggling to give legal effect to the terminology. The test developed by the Court to interpret the equality clause, it is submitted, is comprehensive and informed. But the application of the test is sometimes problematic. This paper addresses the evolving concepts of equality and discrimination in South Africa and discusses some of the difficulties with certain aspects of the test for discrimination, including the concepts of unfairness and human dignity, which have caused division among the judiciary.


Author(s):  
Michele Olivier

The 1993 Constitution,1 for the first time in South African history accorded constitutional recognition to international law, thereby bringing an end to the debate on the status of international law in South African domestic law. This step was a symbolic break from the apartheid legal system, which was closely associated with the violation of international law and indicated to the international community that South Africa was willing to abide by internationally accepted rules. More important, however, for South African lawyers are the fundamental changes the constitutional regulation of international law introduced into South African law. The 1993 Constitution dealt with the conclusion of international agreements (sections 82(1)(i) and 231(2)), the status of international law in South African law (section 231(3) and (4)) and the role of international law in interpreting the chapter on fundamental rights (section 35(1)). These provisions were substantially taken over by the 1996 Constitution. The provisions relating to the entry into international agreements and the status thereof in terms of South African law are once again dealt with under section 231. The provisions on customary international law are dealt with separately under section 232. Section 233 deals with the role of international law in the interpretation of legislation, whilst section 39, the equivalent of section 35 of the 1993 Constitution, provides for international law in interpreting the Bill of Rights.


Author(s):  
Felix Dube

The failure of the post-apartheid government to deliver on some of the promises of the South African Bill of Rights, coupled with the appropriation of the Bill of Rights by the international human rights movement, create the impression that the Bill of Rights is a neo-liberal instrument which is irrelevant to the needs of South Africans and the realities of their circumstances. If the people of South Africa are convinced that the Bill of Rights embraces a Western agenda more than it expresses their collective aspirations, it will lose its legitimacy. While acknowledging that the conception of the Bill of Rights is contested between the international human rights movement and some South Africans, this article shows that the Bill of Rights was neither adopted nor borrowed from the international human rights movement. South Africans did not assimilate the International Bill of Rights but conceived their own Bill of Rights in the early decades of the 20th Century. The conception of the South African Bill of Rights was a response to colonialism and apartheid and was not a consequence of tutelage by the international human rights movement.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Aaron Mnguni

Language policies are the cornerstone that establish and maintain communication amongst people. Proper communication, particularly amongst speakers of many languages in a country such as South Africa hinges heavily on perceptions regarding the status of the languages used in that specific country. According to the Republic of South African Constitution (Act 108 of 1996), South Africa has eleven official languages. Nine of these official languages (the indigenous African languages), are regarded as historically disadvantaged, while the remaining two, viz. English and Afrikaans enjoyed official recognition under the then ‘apartheid’ era that lasted until 1994. The previously disadvantaged African languages still lag in terms of development, when compared to English and to a lesser extent, Afrikaans. To address this challenge and reverse the status quo, several measures have been undertaken by government, including the passing of an Act called, Use of Official Languages Act, 2012. This Act aims at managing the use of the official languages optimally, with special emphasis on the previously marginalised languages. South Africa is known for developing good language policies but often criticised for producing such good policies for one good purpose only - to display them in office shelves. Following this state of affairs, this article therefore examines the implementation challenges regarding this Act and suggest what could be done to successfully implement it in South Africa. Second, the article also seeks to alleviate the perceived apathy in implementing language policies, particularly in South Africa, and with implications for Africa as a whole.


Author(s):  
D Horsten

The preamble of the Constitution of South Africa, 1996 (the Constitution) contains the commitment to, amongst other things, establish a society based on democratic values, social justice and fundamental human rights, lay the foundations for a democratic and open society in which government is based on the will of the people and every citizen is equally protected by law and improve the quality of life of all citizens and free the potential of each person.  One of the methods used to achieve these objectives is the inclusion of enforceable socio-economic rights in the Chapter 2 Bill of Rights. Despite numerous debates surrounding the issue of enforceability of socioeconomic rights, it has become evident that these rights are indeed enforceable.  Not only does section 7(2) of the Constitution place the state under an obligation to respect, protect, promote and fulfil all rights in the Bill of Rights, including socio-economic rights, but the Constitutional Court has in various decisions passed judgment on issues relating to socio-economic rights, underpinning the fact that these rights are indeed enforceable. The fact that socio-economic rights have been included in the Bill of Rights and are enforceable is, however, not sufficient to achieve the aims set out in the preamble.  In order for these rights to be of any value to the people they seek to protect, they need to be implemented. One of the ways in which the implementation of these rights is monitored is by means of the South African Human Rights Commission's annual Economic and Social Rights Reports.  The aim of this contribution is to assess these reports and to establish the degree to which they contribute to good governance in South Africa with reference to, inter alia, the constitutional mandate of the South African Human Rights Commission, the reporting procedure and the evaluation of reports.


1978 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-8
Author(s):  
Sipho Sepamla ◽  
Christopher Hope

Sydney Sipho Sepamla was born in 1932 and has lived most of his life in Soweto, the giant township southwest of Johannesburg, so recently notorious. Soweto, with an unofficial population perhaps upward of a million (so much in Soweto has been unofficial always, even the people are thought of as temporary sojourners) living in a vast dormitory of jerry-built houses stretching for astonishing miles over the flat, bleak veld, existing in the minds of the planners and ideologues as merely a place to sleep the thousands who service the white city next door by day. Sepamla must be ranked along with Oswald Mtshali and Wally Mongane Serote among what I might call the poets of the new cities. I am referring not to Johannesburg, Cape Town and Durban, but to their black satellites, Soweto, Langa and Kwa Mashu, cities of night attending the cities of the sun. Such mirror images and inverted relationships are characteristic in South Africa. In his anthology of Black South African verse, the first and best introduction to the new city poets, which takes its title from Sepamla's fine satirical poem ‘To Whom It May Concern’, Robert Royston remarked that the new poetry was ‘a form of self-preservation’. However angry and expressive it might be, it presented less of a target to censors, priests and police who had sunk, literally without trace, an entire raft of black prose writers in the fifties and sixties. Understandably, some of the new city verse is assertive, angry and confused - but in South African poetry there has been nothing so invigorating for years. What sets Sepamla apart from the others, I think, has been a certain wariness of political rhetoric, a most un-South African subtlety. There is nothing unusual about using the big stick in South Africa; everybody has one. But in a country of brutal distinctions what is truly rare is the ability to distinguish. Sepamla's is a nervy, urban sensibility, perfectly suited to finding the chinks in the regime's fibrous armour and thrusting in his spear. He is at his steely best in ‘the deadpan, factual, throwaway line’ which Douglas Livingstone has pointed to, splendidly instanced in this poem, ‘The Will’: The burglar-proofing and the gate will go to my elder son so will the bicycle and a pair of bracelets His strength is double-edged; not only does he recount the pains of the blacks under apartheid, but articulates, too, the white nightmare of dispossession, often imagined, always expected, forever abjured. Sepamla's books include Hurry Up To It! ( 1975) and The Blues Is You In Me ( 1976), both published in Johannesburg. With the publication of The Soweto I Love his work is for the first time available abroad. He edits the review New Classic ( named for the dry-cleaning business in the room above which the magazine was founded), now in its latest metamorphosis and always amongst the most worthwhile South African little magazines open to the work of black writers. He edits, too, the drama magazine, Sketsh!


Author(s):  
Cornelius Hagenmeier ◽  
Tapiwa Shumba ◽  
Obeng Mireku

Globalisation requires ever closer co-operation between legal professionals hailing from different national jurisdictions. This interactive global environment has fostered growing international training and mobility among legal practitioners and the internationalisation of legal education. Increasing numbers of law students get trained in other countries as part of their undergraduate degrees or even come to foreign shores to obtain law degrees. Many students hailing from other African countries study towardsLLBdegrees at South African universities. Major commercial law firms ensure that they can offer in-house expertise on major foreign legal systems and co-operate with partner firms in other parts of the globe.The General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), to which South Africa is a party, is a multilateral agreement focusing on the liberalisation of trade in services amongst member countries. Services under the GATS system include legal services. The commitments made by South Africa under this agreement require that South Africa allows foreign legal practitioners to establish a commercial presence or be transferred to South Africa. The Bill of Rights entrenched in Chapter 2 of the South African Constitution guarantees fundamental rights including the right to equality and freedom of trade, occupation and profession. With the coming into force of the new Legal Practice Act 28 of 2014, which provides a legislative framework for regulating the affairs of legal practitioners, including their admission and enrolment, it is necessary to assess the extent to which the Act complies with the GATS rules and the South African Constitution.This paper examines the new Legal Practice Act 28 of 2014, and examines whether the Act addresses the conflicts that have always existed between the regulation of the legal profession and the admission of legal practitioners in South Africa with South Africa's commitments under the GATS system. Using the doctrinal legal method, it analyses and evaluates the rules governing the admission of foreign attorneys in South Africa from two perspectives. First, it considers them in the light of the international law obligations of the country and second it evaluates whether or not they comply with the South African Constitution, and more specifically with the Bill of Rights entrenched in the South African Constitution. While the new legislation may assist in ensuring the compliance of South Africa with the relevant GATS rules, it will depend on the regulations which still have to be promulgated to what extent the new legal framework will achieve the full compliance of South Africa with all relevant GATS rules.The paper concludes with recommendations for the reform of the Legal Practice Act. It argues that while the requirement to be a South African permanent resident in order to qualify for admission as an attorney may be justifiable in terms of GATS and in terms of South African constitutional law, it is not in South Africa's best interest to retain it. Consequently, the paper calls for the repeal of the permanent residence requirement for admission as an attorney in the county.


2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andre Mangu

After several decades of apartheid rule, which denied human rights to the majority of the population on the ground of race and came to be regarded as a crime against humanity, South Africa adopted its first democratic Constitution in the early 1990s. The 1996 Constitution, which succeeded the 1993 interim Constitution, is considered one of the most progressive in the world. In its founding provisions, it states that South Africa is a democratic state founded on human dignity, the achievement of equality, the advancement of human rights and freedoms. The Constitution enshrines fundamental human rights in a justiciable Bill of Rights as a cornerstone of democracy. Unfortunately, in the eyes of a number of politicians, officials and lay-persons, the rights in the Bill of Rights accrue to South African citizens only. Xenophobia, which has been rampant since the end of apartheid, seems to support the idea that foreigners should not enjoy these rights. Foreign nationals have often been accused of posing a threat to South African citizens with regard to employment opportunities. In light of the South African legislation and jurisprudence, this article affirms the position of the South African labour law that foreign nationals are indeed protected by the Constitution and entitled to rights in the Bill of Rights, including the rights to work and fair labour practices.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document