The 1st ‘Advanced Academy on International Studies in Human Rights and Humanitarian Law’ on Robben Island, Cape Town (S.A.)

2002 ◽  
Vol 3 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Florian Hoffmann
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
New South ◽  
Vice President ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
International Studies ◽  
Western Cape ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
To Come ◽  
Robben Island

“ROBBEN ISLAND IS A VERY SPECIAL PLACE in the new South Africa. No one in South Africa [and few elsewhere] refuses an invitation to come here“; with these words Justice Pius Langa, Vice-President of the South African Constitutional Court, aptly alluded to the symbolic significance of the place chosen as the venue for this first International Human Rights Academy. Indeed, it turned out to be quite an ingenuine idea on part of the Academy's organisers -namely Prof. Jeremy Sarkin from the University of Western Cape (UWC), Prof. Leo Zwaak from Utrecht University, and Prof. Johan Vande Lannotte from Ghent University, as well as Prof. Asbjorn Eide from the Norwegian Institute of Human Rights- to bring, for the first time ever, thirty-five participants from twenty-two countries to the place where Nelson Mandela served eighteen of his 27-years in prison and about which one of his fellow inmates, Ahmed Kathrada, who is now the Chairperson of the Robben Island Council, said that “we [the ex-prisoners] would want Robben Island to reflect the triumph of freedom and human dignity over oppression and humiliation, of courage and determination over weakness, of a new South Africa over the old”. As such, it was, perhaps, the ideal place to devote a good two-and-a-half-weeks (from April 3 to 20) to human rights in all their shades and colours.

Notes: Splitting hairs? Bwanya v The Master of the High Court

2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (3) ◽  
pp. 521-534
Author(s):  
Fatima Osman
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Western Cape ◽  
Sex Partners ◽  
Stare Decisis ◽  
High Court ◽  
Opposite Sex ◽  
Central Argument ◽  
To Come ◽  
Near Future

In Bwanya v The Master of the High Court 2021 (1) SA 138 (WCC), the Western Cape High Court ordered that the applicant, a partner in an opposite-sex partnership, was entitled to inherit from her deceased partner’s estate by ordering an amendment of the Intestate Succession Act 81 of 1987 to cater for unmarried opposite-sex partners. The court distinguished the case from Volks NO v Robinson 2005 (5) BCLR 446 (CC) — which precludes an unmarried partner from claiming maintenance from the deceased partner’s estate — on the basis that the case involved an inheritance claim as opposed to maintenance. The note argues that the failure of the court to deal with the central argument in Volks in respect of inheritance rights undermines the strength of the judgment. The Constitutional Court in confirmation proceedings should address this matter, and consider a softening of the doctrine of stare decisis to overrule the Volks case. Furthermore, the case opens the door to claims by other unmarried partners in polygamous relationships. While such claims involve policy considerations that are best addressed by the legislature, they are likely to come before the courts in the near future. Courts should recognise such claims in acknowledgment of the diversity in family formations in South Africa.

The implications of the decision in Helen Suzman Foundation v Judicial Service Commission 2018 (7) BCLR 763 (CC) 8 on the functioning of the South African Judicial Service Commission

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nomthandazo Ntlama
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
South African ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Service Commission ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
Future Management

ABSTRACT The article examines the implications of the judgment of the Constitutional Court in Helen Suzman Foundation v Judicial Service Commission 2018 (7) BCLR 763 (CC) 8 on the functioning of the Judicial Service Commission (JSC). The judgment has brought to the fore a new lease of life relating to the JSC's post-interview deliberations as a disclosable record in terms of Rule 53(1)(b) of the Uniform Rules of Court. The disclosure seeks to provide an insight into the decision-making process of the JSC in the appointment of judicial officers in South Africa. It is argued that the judgment is two-pronged: first, the disclosure of the post-interview record enhances the culture of justification for decisions taken, which advances the foundational values of the new democratic dispensation; secondly, it creates uncertainty about the future management and protection of the JSC processes in the undertaking of robust debates on the post-interview deliberations. It then questions whether the JSC members will be privileged in their engagement with the suitability of the candidates to be recommended for appointment by the President. The question is raised against the uncertainty about which decision of the JSC will be challenged that will need the disclosure of the record because the judgment does not entail the national disclosure of the record in respect of each candidate but applies only when there is an application for review of the JSC decision. Key words: Judicial Service Commission, appointments, discretion, judiciary, independence, rule of law, discretion, accountability, transparency, human rights.

scholarly journals Sedimentological evidence for seiching in a swell-dominated headland-bay system: Table Bay, Western Cape, South Africa

2021 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mike Woodborne ◽  
Burg Flemming
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Standing Wave ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Logarithmic Spiral ◽  
Distribution Patterns ◽  
Western Cape ◽  
Sediment Distribution ◽  
Maximum Period ◽  
Hydrodynamic Processes ◽  
Robben Island

AbstractTable Bay, South Africa, is a typical headland-bay system with a shoreline that can be described by a logarithmic spiral. A peculiarity and unique feature of Table Bay is the juxtaposition of Robben Island opposite its headland. As a consequence, the bathymetry defines an ellipsoidal basin which was postulated to potentially resonate in the form of long-period standing waves (seiches). One aim of this study, therefore, was to investigate whether any evidence for such resonant oscillations could be detected in the geomorphology and sediment distribution patterns. Indeed, the ellipsoidal shape of the basin can be framed by two converging log-spirals with their centres located opposite each other, one off Robben Island and the other on the Cape Town side of the bay. The so-called apex line, which divides the two spirals into equal parts is aligned SW–NE, i.e. more or less parallel to the direction of ocean wave propagation. The distribution patterns of all sedimentary parameters were found to be characterised by a strikingly similar trend to either side of the apex line. This supports the hypothesis that the basin of Table Bay appears to resonate in the form of a mode 1 standing wave, with the node positioned above the apex line in the centre of the bay. The maximum period of such a standing wave was calculated to be around 37 min. The study demonstrates that large-scale sediment distribution patterns can reveal the existence of specific hydrodynamic processes in coastal embayments. It is recommended that this phenomenon be investigated in greater detail aimed at verifying the existence of resonant oscillations in Table Bay and, in the event, at establishing its precise nature and trigger mechanism.

scholarly journals Modderklip Revisited: Can Courts Compel the State to Expropriate Property where the Eviction of Unlawful Occupiers is not Just and Equitable?

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
Jackie Dugard
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
The State ◽  
Court Case ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Western Cape ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Republic

This article examines whether, to give effect to the section 26 constitutional right to adequate housing, courts can (or should) compel the state to expropriate property in instances when it is not just and equitable to evict unlawful occupiers from privately-owned land (unfeasible eviction). This question was first raised in the Modderklip case, where both the Supreme Court of Appeal (Modder East Squatters v Modderklip Boerdery (Pty) Ltd; President of the Republic of South Africa v Modderklip Boerdery (Pty) Ltd 2004 3 All SA 169 (SCA)) and Constitutional Court (President of the Republic of South Africa v Modderklip Boerdery (Pty) Ltd 2005 5 SA 3 (CC)). dodged the question, opting instead to award constitutional damages to the property owner for the long-term occupation of its property by unlawful occupiers. It is clear from cases such as Ekurhuleni Municipality v Dada 2009 4 SA 463 (SCA), that, mindful of separation of powers concerns, courts have until very recently been unwilling to order the state to expropriate property in such circumstances. At the same time, it is increasingly evident that the state has failed to fulfil its constitutional obligations to provide alternative accommodation for poor communities. In this context, this article argues that there is a growing need for the judiciary to consider, as part of its role to craft effective remedies for constitutional rights violations, the issue of judicial expropriation. It does so, first, through an analysis of the relevant jurisprudence on evictions sought by private landowners and, second, through an in-depth engagement of the recent Western Cape High Court case, Fischer v Persons Listed on Annexure X to the Notice of Motion and those Persons whose Identity are Unknown to the Applicant and who are Unlawfully Occupying or Attempting to Occupy Erf 150 (Remaining Extent) Phillipi, Cape Division, Province of the Western Cape; Stock v Persons Unlawfully Occupying Erven 145, 152, 156, 418, 3107, Phillipi & Portion 0 Farm 597, Cape Rd; Copper Moon Trading 203 (Pty) Ltd v Persons whose Identities are to the Applicant Unknown and who are Unlawfully Occupying Remainder Erf 149, Phillipi, Cape Town 2018 2 SA 228 (WCC).    

scholarly journals NEW DILEMMAS AND NEW DIRECTIONS IN SOUTH AFRICA AFTER APARTHEID

Afrika Focus ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefaan Anrys ◽  
David Chan ◽  
Albie Sachs
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Coming Out ◽  
New South ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Third ◽  
New Directions ◽  
Freedom Fighters ◽  
Apartheid Regime ◽  
The Many

On 3 October 2016, Sachs, who collects honorary doctorates and other titles as if they were panini stickers, visited Ghent University for the third Mandela Lecture organised by the Africa Platform of the Ghent University Association, and moderated by Prof. Eva Brems. This interview was conducted on that occasion. ‘Since the attempt on my life, I see everything as rose-tinted’, laughs the man who sur- vived an attack, abolished the death penalty and was close to the ANC leadership. ‘If I were to become pessimistic about South Africa, people would really get scared, they’d say: Oh, even Albie doesn’t like it anymore ’(laughs). In 1988 Albie Sachs was viciously attacked, losing his right arm and the sight of one eye. He was living in exile in Mozambique at the time, as South Africa suffered under the Apartheid regime. Sachs was one of the prominent freedom fighters, but survived the assassination attempt and eventually became an important member of the ANC, one of the many authors of the Constitution of the new South Africa. He was also invited by Mandela to sit on the Constitutional Court, which abolished the death penalty and forced Parliament to legalise LGBT marriage. In Ghent, the now 81-year-old freedom fighter nuances the pessimistic news coming out of South Africa. ‘A lot is going wrong in South Africa. But what gives me hope is that people can speak their minds. Our democracy works. Our institutions work, and not just the courts and tribunals. Recently we had elections, and they were free and fair. And yes, the ANC lost the elections. But that is in fact the best evidence that our democracy works.’

scholarly journals COLD COMFORT FOR THE PARTIES TO A MUSLIM MARRIAGE - THE SAGA CONTINUES Hassam v Jacobs NO (Muslim Youth Movement of South Africa and Women’s Legal Trust as Amici Curiae [2009] ZACC 19

Obiter ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Razaana Denson ◽  
Glynis van der Walt
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Cape Town ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Western Cape ◽  
Youth Movement ◽  
High Court ◽  
Muslim Youth ◽  
The Republic

In Hassam v Jacobs NO (Muslim Youth Movement of South Africa and Women’s Legal Trust as Amici Curiae) ([2009] ZACC 19), the Constitutional Court was faced with an application for the confirmation of constitutional invalidity of section 1(4)(f) of the Intestate Succession Act 81 of 1987 (hereinafter “the ISA”). The application was made pursuant to the decision of the Western Cape High Court, Cape Town in Hassam v Jacobs NO ([2008] 4 All SA 350 (C)), where it was held that the word “spouse” as utilized in the ISA could be extended to include parties in a de facto polygynous Muslim marriage. The impugned provisions of the ISA were held to exclude widows of polygynous Muslim marriages in a discriminatory manner from the protection offered by the ISA. The Western Cape High Court therefore declared section 1(4)(f) of the ISA to be inconsistent with the Constitution as it makes provision for only one spouse in a marriage entered into in accordance with the tenets Muslim rites to be an heir. The decision of Western Cape High Court was referred to the Constitutional Court in terms of section 172(2)(a) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act, Act 108 of 1996.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document