PDF LIST OF AUTHORITIES CASE LAW SOUTHERN AFRICA PAGE - ConCourt

(1)

LIST OF AUTHORITIES

CASE LAW

SOUTHERN AFRICA

PAGE

Case and Another v Minister of Safety and Security and Others; 44 Curtis v Minister of Safety and Security and Others 1996(3) SA

617 (CC)

De Lille and Another v Speaker of the National Assembly 1998(7) 45 BCLR 916 (C)

Mistry v Interim National Medical and Dental Council of South Africa 45 and Others 1998(7) BCLR 880 (CC)

Director of Public Prosecutions : Cape of Good Hope v Bathgate 44 2000(1) SACR 105 (CPD)

De Lange v Smuts and Others 1998 (3) SA 785 (CC) 12, 25 Ex Parte Chairperson of the Constitutional Assembly: In re certification 11 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 1996(4) SA 744 (CC)

Qozeleni v Minister of Law and Order and Another 1994 (3) SA 625 E 29 South African Association of Personal Injury Lawyers v Heath and Others 24, 28 (Unreported decision of the Constitutional Court

as per CCT 27/00 decided on 28 November 2000)

S v Blaauw 1999 (2) SACR 295 (W) 21

S v Dithotze 1999 (2) SACR 314 (W) 21

S v Dlamini; S v Dladla and Others; S v Joubert; S v Schietekat 25 1999 (7) BCLR 771 at par 43

S v Dzukuda and Others; S v Tshilo 2000 (4) SA 1078 (CC) 20, 22, 32, 36

S v Lukuwa 1999 (5) BCLR 599 (Nm) at 604 19, 36

(i)

S v Makwanyana and Another 1995 (3) SA 391 (CC) 2, 37, 39, 41, 42, 45

(2)

S v Silaule en ‘n Ander 1999 (2) SACR 102 (SC) 2

S v Swartz and Another1999 (2) SACR 380 (C) 21

S v Toms; S v Bruce 1990 (2) SA 802 (A) 16

S v Vries 1996 (12) (BCLR) 1666 (Nm) 7, 8, 19,

36, 37

S v Zuma and Others 1995 (2) SA 842 (CC) 29, 32

CANADA

R v Smith [1987] 1 SCR 1045 19, 36, 37

http://www.lexum.umontreal.ca/csc-scc/en/index.html par 48 p. 17 of the printed judgement;

par 4 p. 7 of the printed judgement

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Coker v Georgia 433 US 588 (1977) 36

http://guide.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/supreme.html

Harmelin v Michigan 501 US 957 (1991) 18, 19

http://guide.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/supreme.html p. 1 and p. 3 of the printed judgement

Hutto v Davis 454 US 370 (1982) 18

Mistretta v US 488 US 361 (1989) 8, 18, 44

http://guide.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/supreme.html p. 4 of the printed judgement

Rummel v Estelle 445 US 263 (1980) 18

(ii)

Weems v US 217 US 349 (1910) 17, 36

Http://guide.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/supreme.html

(3)

p. 12 of the printed judgement

OTHER SOURCES

Carpenter, Gretchen “Introduction to South African Constitutional Law” 12 1987; Butterworths

Hansard, 6 November 1997 p. 6421 7 Hansard, 6 November 1997, p. 6423 4 Moolman, Neels “Escaping Justice? Let us look at the score board” 1999 (12) 3 SAJCJ 13

J W Petalson “Corwin & Peltason’s Understanding the Constitution” 18 13th Edition, p. 329 -330

Pitfield DJ and Naude CMB “Public Opinion on crime seriousness 3 and sentencing” 1999 12 SAJCJ 22

South African Law Commission: Discussion Paper 91, Project 82, Summary 6 South African Law Commission: Issue Paper II, Project 82 3 Wiechers “ Administrative Law”, Butterworths, 1985 27

(iii)

IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA

(4)

CASE CCT 1/01 In the matter between

THE STATE Plaintiff versus

BUZANI DODO Defendant

FILING SHEET

Presented for filing: Plaintiff’s heads of argument.

DATED at Pretoria on this 15^th day of FEBRUARY 2001.

FILED BY : Office of the National Director of Public Prosecutions Maize Board Building

c/o Beatrix and Belverdere Streets Arcadia

PRETORIA 0001

Reference No. 1/1/2/3 - 1/01 TO : The Director

Constitutional Court Braamfontein Forum II 33 Hoofd Street

BRAAMFONTEIN 2017

TO : Adv B Boswell

Appearing on behalf of the Defendant St George’s Chambers

Grahamstown 6140

Fax: (046) 622 6076 - 2 - AND TO : The Minister of Justice

(5)

Private Bag X 276 PRETORIA 0001

Reference: Mr J N Labuschagne Fax: (012) 3211708

AND TO : The Director of Public Prosecutions: Eastern Cape Private Bag X 1009

Grahamstown 6140

Reference: Adv L Roberts

IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA

(6)

CASE CCT 1/01

In the matter between

THE STATE Plaintiff versus

BUZANI DODO Defendant

PLAINTIFF’S MAIN HEADS OF ARGUMENT

INDEX

PAGE

A. INTRODUCTION 1

(7)

B. THE CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT ACT, ACT NO 105 OF 1977 2

B1. BACKGROUND TO THE LEGISLATION 2 B2. PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES OF THE LEGISLATION 7 B3. THE LIMITED SCOPE FOR THE APPLICATION OF 9

SECTION 51 OF THE ACT

C. IS SECTION 52 OF THE ACT INCONSISTENT WITH THE 11 SEPARATION OF POWERS REQUIRED BY THE CONSTITUTION?

C1. INTRODUCTION 11

C2. THE LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY 15

C3. JUDICIAL AUTHORITY 22

D. IS SECTION 52 OF THE ACT INCONSISTENT WITH THE 29 ACCUSED’S RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL UNDER SECTION 35(3)

OF THE CONSTITUTION?

E. IS SECTION 51 OF THE ACT INCONSISTENT WITH THE 34 ACCUSED’S RIGHT TO HUMAN DIGNITY UNDER SECTIONS

10 AND 12(1)(e) OF THE CONSTITUTION

F. THE LIMITATION CLAUSE 39

F1. INTRODUCTION 39

F2. DISCUSSION OF FACTORS AS LISTED IN SECTION 36 40 F2.1 THE NATURE OF THE RIGHT 40

PAGE

F2.2 THE IMPORTANCE OF THE PURPOSE OF THE 41 LIMITATION

F2.3 THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF THE LIMITATION 43 F2.4 THE RELATION BETWEEN THE LIMITATION AND 44

ITS PURPOSE

(8)

F2.5 LESS RESTRICTIVE MEANS TO ACHIEVE THE PURPOSE 45

G. CONCLUSION 47

LIST OF AUTHORITIES