Research Articles (Law of Procedure and Law of Evidence)

Permanent URI for this collection

http://hdl.handle.net/11660/187

Browse

Browsing Research Articles (Law of Procedure and Law of Evidence) by Author "Swanepoel, C. F."

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    The demise of the Roman-Dutch 'kommer-recht: interpretation of statutes so as to conform to the spirit, purport and objects of the South African Bill of Rights
    (Faculty of Law, University of the Free State, 2009-06) Swanepoel, C. F.
    English: The Supreme Court of Appeal (in a judgment dated 23.11.07) in the case of Bid Industrial Holdings v Strang (2007) SCA 144 (RSA) (now cited as 2008(3) SA 355 (SCA)) held that the common-law requirement of arrest to found or confirm jurisdiction where an incola plaintiff wishes to sue a foreign peregrinus, which procedure is authorised in section 19(1) (c) of the Supreme Court Act 59/1959, is unconstitutional. In essence it was so held because such an arrest restricts a person's liberty and freedom (as entrenched in section 12 (1) of the Constitution) without a just cause. This article evaluates the judgment and highlights the importance of the full historical context and rationale for the existence of a common-law rule as yardstick against which to measure its constitutional justifiability. In this instance the rationale for the existence of the common-law rule of jurisdictional arrest was also, in essence, premised on the unequal treatment of foreigners vis à vis citizens, and predictably, this could not have passed the standard set by section 39(2) of the Constitution. The article investigates the method employed by the SCA in its interpretation of the alleged unconstitutional stipulations of the Supreme Court Act so as to bring it in line with the spirit,purport and objects of the South African Bill of Rights. Special attention is paid to the criticism of the judgment that it failed to comply with the peremptory stipulations of section 172 of the Constitution. The article concludes that such criticism is unwarranted.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    South Africa's obligation as member state of the International Criminal Court: the Al-Bashir controversy
    (Faculty of Law, University of the Free State, 2015) Swanepoel, C. F.
    This article is a commentary on the judgement of the North Gauteng High Court on 24 June 2015 in the matter of The Southern Africa Litigation Centre v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development, which dealt with the recent controversy surrounding the South African government's failure to arrest Mr Omar Hassan Ahmed al-Bashir, president of the Republic of Sudan, to be prosecuted by the International Criminal Court (ICC). This judgement will be analysed with particular reference to the ICC's Pre-Trial Chamber Decision on the Cooperation of the Democratic Republic of the Congo Regarding Omar Al Bashir's Arrest and Surrender to the Court, to which the North Gauteng court referred. The judgement of 24 June was preceded by an order of the court on 14 June, which declared the state's conduct constitutionally invalid, having failed to take steps to arrest and/or detain Mr Bashir. The state was ordered to take all reasonable steps to "prepare to arrest President Bashir without a warrant in terms of section 40 (1) (k) of the Criminal Procedure Act, 51 of 1977 and detain him, pending a formal request for his surrender from the International Criminal Court". The judgement under discussion is the court's reasons for this order.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Universal jurisdiction as procedural tool to institute prosecutions for international core crimes
    (Faculty of Law, University of the Free State, 2007-06) Swanepoel, C. F.
    English: The establishment of the International Criminal Court (ICC) with its intended purpose of ending the cycle of impunity that has notoriously attached to the perpetrators of gross human rights violations in the past hails a new chapter in international criminal law and justice. The structure of jurisdiction introduced by the ICC relies to a great extent on the co-operation of states to nationally prosecute perpetrators of gross violations of human rights. The ICC itself is intended to complement national jurisdiction and will only prosecute the most serious international crimes where the state that can exercise jurisdiction is either unwilling or unable to do so. This by necessity implies that states that are party to the ICC will be expected to establish and foster ways and means to enable themselves to investigate, prosecute, defend, adjudicate and to provide assistance to the ICC. One of the grounds upon which a state may exercise jurisdiction in terms of international criminal law is that of universal jurisdiction. This article explores aspects of the principle of universal jurisdiction and concludes that its application and development is of utmost importance in the quest of the international community to establish a credible international legal order.