Translating socioeconomic rights from abstract paper rights to fully fledged individual rights: lessons from South Africa

C. Mbazira
{"title":"Translating socioeconomic rights from abstract paper rights to fully fledged individual rights: lessons from South Africa","authors":"C. Mbazira","doi":"10.4314/EAJPHR.V12I2.39358","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The South African Constitutional Court has given effective the economic,\nsocial and cultural rights in the South African Constitution by defining the nature of the obligations that they engender. In this respect, both the Constitution and the jurisprudence offer immense lessons to other domestic jurisdictions on the African continent and elsewhere. In spite of this, the approach of the Court still falls behind international jurisprudence in some respects. The most visible shortfall is rejection of the minimum core\nobligations approach which would obligate the state to provide to everyone a minimum level of goods and services. The Court has instead opted for a reasonableness review approach. However, the failure to give substantive content to the rights has made it impossible to fully interrogate the reasonableness of the means chosen by the state to realize the rights. This article proposes a proportionality test to be used to interrogate the means chosen to realize the rights, which is only effective after giving substantive\ncontent to the rights. The article also proposes ways through which the minimum core approach could be used without over burdening the state. The provision of a minimum core should be directed towards those who need it. East African Journal of Peace and Human Rights Vol. 12 (2) 2006: pp. 183-232","PeriodicalId":296246,"journal":{"name":"East African journal of peace and human rights","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"East African journal of peace and human rights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4314/EAJPHR.V12I2.39358","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The South African Constitutional Court has given effective the economic, social and cultural rights in the South African Constitution by defining the nature of the obligations that they engender. In this respect, both the Constitution and the jurisprudence offer immense lessons to other domestic jurisdictions on the African continent and elsewhere. In spite of this, the approach of the Court still falls behind international jurisprudence in some respects. The most visible shortfall is rejection of the minimum core obligations approach which would obligate the state to provide to everyone a minimum level of goods and services. The Court has instead opted for a reasonableness review approach. However, the failure to give substantive content to the rights has made it impossible to fully interrogate the reasonableness of the means chosen by the state to realize the rights. This article proposes a proportionality test to be used to interrogate the means chosen to realize the rights, which is only effective after giving substantive content to the rights. The article also proposes ways through which the minimum core approach could be used without over burdening the state. The provision of a minimum core should be directed towards those who need it. East African Journal of Peace and Human Rights Vol. 12 (2) 2006: pp. 183-232
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
将社会经济权利从抽象的纸上权利转化为完全成熟的个人权利:来自南非的教训
南非宪法法院通过界定这些权利所产生的义务的性质,有效地赋予了《南非宪法》中的经济、社会和文化权利。在这方面,《宪法》和判例为非洲大陆和其他地方的其他国内司法管辖区提供了巨大的经验教训。尽管如此,法院的做法在某些方面仍落后于国际法理学。最明显的不足是拒绝了最低核心义务方法,该方法将要求国家向每个人提供最低水平的商品和服务。法院转而选择了一种合理的审查办法。然而,由于没有赋予权利实质性的内容,国家为实现权利所选择的手段的合理性就无法得到充分的拷问。本文提出了一种比例性检验方法,用于审查权利实现方式的选择,这种检验方法只有在赋予权利实质性内容后才有效。文章还提出了在不增加国家负担的情况下使用最小核心方法的方法。最低限度核心的提供应该针对那些需要它的人。东非和平与人权杂志,第12卷(2),2006年:第183-232页
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis: pharmacists knowledge, perception and willingness to adopt future implementation in a Zimbabwean urban setting The International Criminal Court and Lubanga: The Feminist Critique and Jus Cogens Access To Information, Gender Participation And Good Governance In Uganda Translating socioeconomic rights from abstract paper rights to fully fledged individual rights: lessons from South Africa Globalization nonsense upon stilts? Reflections on the globalization and human rights nexus
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1