Pub Date : 2020-01-02DOI: 10.1080/02587203.2020.1788419
S. Mahomedy
Abstract Twenty-five years after the formal end of apartheid, the majority of South Africans still live in poverty, with the attainment of socio-economic rights remaining elusive. While some progress has been made, there is a clear need for new approaches to ensure that rights to housing, food and education are fulfilled in reality, and do not merely remain words in a well-written constitution. In this regard, one approach that holds great potential for expediting the realisation of socio-economic rights is extra-judicial engagement. Extra-judicial engagement here refers to participatory processes occurring outside of courts. However, there is a need to ensure that concerns about the quality of such engagement are addressed to strengthen its success in aiding the realisation of socio-economic rights. The #FeesMustFall movement is a practical attempt at extra-judicial engagement and can thus provide useful insights into the potential and challenges relating thereto.
{"title":"Extra-judicial engagement in socio-economic rights realisation: Lessons from #FeesMustFall","authors":"S. Mahomedy","doi":"10.1080/02587203.2020.1788419","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02587203.2020.1788419","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Twenty-five years after the formal end of apartheid, the majority of South Africans still live in poverty, with the attainment of socio-economic rights remaining elusive. While some progress has been made, there is a clear need for new approaches to ensure that rights to housing, food and education are fulfilled in reality, and do not merely remain words in a well-written constitution. In this regard, one approach that holds great potential for expediting the realisation of socio-economic rights is extra-judicial engagement. Extra-judicial engagement here refers to participatory processes occurring outside of courts. However, there is a need to ensure that concerns about the quality of such engagement are addressed to strengthen its success in aiding the realisation of socio-economic rights. The #FeesMustFall movement is a practical attempt at extra-judicial engagement and can thus provide useful insights into the potential and challenges relating thereto.","PeriodicalId":44989,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal on Human Rights","volume":"36 1","pages":"49 - 73"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02587203.2020.1788419","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47562203","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-02DOI: 10.1080/02587203.2019.1718391
R. Adams
{"title":"Stopping the spies: constructing and resisting the surveillance state in South Africa","authors":"R. Adams","doi":"10.1080/02587203.2019.1718391","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02587203.2019.1718391","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44989,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal on Human Rights","volume":"35 1","pages":"441 - 446"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02587203.2019.1718391","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48352095","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-02DOI: 10.1080/02587203.2020.1717366
B. Townsend, D. Thaldar
Abstract Biobanks (organised collections of human biological material and associated information stored for research purposes) are becoming invaluable to human health research. However, concerns have been voiced in the literature that POPIA – the new legislation that aims to protect personal information – may stymie the functioning of South African biobanks. The main reason for the concern is the dichotomy between specific consent (consent to use biological material and associated information for a specific research study) and broad consent (consent to use biological material and associated information for a variety of future research studies): While the current ethical and legal regulatory framework applicable to biobanks in South Africa requires only broad consent, POPIA appears to increase the benchmark to specific consent. A common model for building biobanks in South Africa is what we refer to as the ‘dual consent’ model – namely to obtain both specific consent for an initial research study, and broad consent for storage of material and associated information and the use thereof in future studies. We analyse the provisions of POPIA from a biobanking perspective, and conclude that biobanks that were built using the dual consent model would be able to use their collections of material and associated information for further new research studies, provided they comply with three conditions: (1) non-publication of the genetic information in an identifiable form; (2) the research must be in the public interest; and (3) sufficient guarantees must be in place to protect the research participants’ privacy. However, biobanks that were built using other models that did not include specific consent for the initial research study, would have to opt for either de-identification of their material and associated information, or obtain new specific consent from their research participants for a new research study.
{"title":"Navigating uncharted waters: biobanks and informational privacy in South Africa","authors":"B. Townsend, D. Thaldar","doi":"10.1080/02587203.2020.1717366","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02587203.2020.1717366","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Biobanks (organised collections of human biological material and associated information stored for research purposes) are becoming invaluable to human health research. However, concerns have been voiced in the literature that POPIA – the new legislation that aims to protect personal information – may stymie the functioning of South African biobanks. The main reason for the concern is the dichotomy between specific consent (consent to use biological material and associated information for a specific research study) and broad consent (consent to use biological material and associated information for a variety of future research studies): While the current ethical and legal regulatory framework applicable to biobanks in South Africa requires only broad consent, POPIA appears to increase the benchmark to specific consent. A common model for building biobanks in South Africa is what we refer to as the ‘dual consent’ model – namely to obtain both specific consent for an initial research study, and broad consent for storage of material and associated information and the use thereof in future studies. We analyse the provisions of POPIA from a biobanking perspective, and conclude that biobanks that were built using the dual consent model would be able to use their collections of material and associated information for further new research studies, provided they comply with three conditions: (1) non-publication of the genetic information in an identifiable form; (2) the research must be in the public interest; and (3) sufficient guarantees must be in place to protect the research participants’ privacy. However, biobanks that were built using other models that did not include specific consent for the initial research study, would have to opt for either de-identification of their material and associated information, or obtain new specific consent from their research participants for a new research study.","PeriodicalId":44989,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal on Human Rights","volume":"35 1","pages":"329 - 350"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02587203.2020.1717366","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44963959","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-02DOI: 10.1080/02587203.2019.1703558
Amanda Spies
Abstract Dissent plays an important role in judicial decision-making and can have a far-reaching impact on the development of law. It is therefore important to analyse the role that dissenting judgments plays in legal decision-making and question how dissenting arguments influence the functioning of a court and, in this instance, specifically the Constitutional Court. This case note analyses the judgment in Prince v President, Cape Law Society (2002) and traces how the dissenting judgment became the majority decision in Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development v Prince (2018). The case note highlights the need for contextual evidence in judicial decision-making and its importance in understanding the wider impact legal decisions might have.
异议在司法决策中发挥着重要作用，对法律的发展有着深远的影响。因此，重要的是要分析持不同意见的判决在法律决策中所起的作用，并质疑持不同意见如何影响法院的运作，在这种情况下，尤其是宪法法院的运作。本案例说明分析了Prince诉President，Cape Law Society（2002）一案的判决，并追溯了司法和宪法发展部长诉Prince（2018）一案中反对判决如何成为多数裁决。案例说明强调了在司法决策中需要背景证据，以及其在理解法律裁决可能产生的更广泛影响方面的重要性。
{"title":"The importance of minority judgments in judicial decision-making: an analysis of Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development v Prince","authors":"Amanda Spies","doi":"10.1080/02587203.2019.1703558","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02587203.2019.1703558","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Dissent plays an important role in judicial decision-making and can have a far-reaching impact on the development of law. It is therefore important to analyse the role that dissenting judgments plays in legal decision-making and question how dissenting arguments influence the functioning of a court and, in this instance, specifically the Constitutional Court. This case note analyses the judgment in Prince v President, Cape Law Society (2002) and traces how the dissenting judgment became the majority decision in Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development v Prince (2018). The case note highlights the need for contextual evidence in judicial decision-making and its importance in understanding the wider impact legal decisions might have.","PeriodicalId":44989,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal on Human Rights","volume":"35 1","pages":"429 - 440"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02587203.2019.1703558","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49112201","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-02DOI: 10.1080/02587203.2020.1740888
Lindani Nxumalo
Abstract South Africa is a party to various international human rights instruments that obligate it to develop enforcement mechanisms to include persons with disabilities in the workplace. Among such mechanisms is the need to develop legislation to deal with workplace disparities. In this context, South Africa has, over the years, enacted different labour laws aimed at addressing disparity and injustices of the past in the workplace. Persons with disabilities are among those who were prejudiced and continue to experience discrimination based on their status. Despite the evolution of the labour legislation and the obligation imposed by international instruments, disability laws are not effectively enforced. While research has been conducted generally on the rights of persons with disabilities, it appears that there has not been much research focussing on the enforcement of disability laws particularly from workplace leader’s perspective. This article therefore seeks to explore South Africa’s obligation towards enforcement of disability provisions in the workplace and recommends a transformational leadership approach to effectively enforce legislation governing disability in the workplace, thereby safeguarding the rights of persons with disabilities.
{"title":"Utilising transformational leadership to implement disability laws in the South African workplace","authors":"Lindani Nxumalo","doi":"10.1080/02587203.2020.1740888","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02587203.2020.1740888","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract South Africa is a party to various international human rights instruments that obligate it to develop enforcement mechanisms to include persons with disabilities in the workplace. Among such mechanisms is the need to develop legislation to deal with workplace disparities. In this context, South Africa has, over the years, enacted different labour laws aimed at addressing disparity and injustices of the past in the workplace. Persons with disabilities are among those who were prejudiced and continue to experience discrimination based on their status. Despite the evolution of the labour legislation and the obligation imposed by international instruments, disability laws are not effectively enforced. While research has been conducted generally on the rights of persons with disabilities, it appears that there has not been much research focussing on the enforcement of disability laws particularly from workplace leader’s perspective. This article therefore seeks to explore South Africa’s obligation towards enforcement of disability provisions in the workplace and recommends a transformational leadership approach to effectively enforce legislation governing disability in the workplace, thereby safeguarding the rights of persons with disabilities.","PeriodicalId":44989,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal on Human Rights","volume":"35 1","pages":"351 - 377"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02587203.2020.1740888","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44197070","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-02DOI: 10.1080/02587203.2020.1745682
Apollin Koagne Zouapet, Misha Ariana Plagis
Abstract On 11 December 2018, the Constitutional Court of South Africa ruled that the President’s signature to the 2014 Protocol concerning the Southern African Development Community (SADC) Tribunal, which limits the authority of the SADC Tribunal, must be withdrawn. As the Court ventured outside the bounds of domestic law in the case, this paper reads those arguments of the Court grounded in international law from an international law perspective. In doing so, we explore the implications, contributions, and dangers that such jurisprudence might entail for general international law, and the SADC legal regime. We ask a number of questions. Is this a domestic court encroaching on international law? What are the consequences of such a move from an international law perspective? And, what does this imply for the future of the SADC Tribunal, and the functioning of this international organisation in general? Through this internationalist reading of the case, we demonstrate how the Constitutional Court’s use of international law has endangered its own decision, as its positions are not defendable within the discipline of public international law. Therefore, while we agree with the overall outcome of the case, we argue that the Constitutional Court has strewn its own path with unnecessary obstacles and traps.
{"title":"Braamfontein encroaching? An internationalist reading of the South African Constitutional Court judgment on the SADC Tribunal","authors":"Apollin Koagne Zouapet, Misha Ariana Plagis","doi":"10.1080/02587203.2020.1745682","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02587203.2020.1745682","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract On 11 December 2018, the Constitutional Court of South Africa ruled that the President’s signature to the 2014 Protocol concerning the Southern African Development Community (SADC) Tribunal, which limits the authority of the SADC Tribunal, must be withdrawn. As the Court ventured outside the bounds of domestic law in the case, this paper reads those arguments of the Court grounded in international law from an international law perspective. In doing so, we explore the implications, contributions, and dangers that such jurisprudence might entail for general international law, and the SADC legal regime. We ask a number of questions. Is this a domestic court encroaching on international law? What are the consequences of such a move from an international law perspective? And, what does this imply for the future of the SADC Tribunal, and the functioning of this international organisation in general? Through this internationalist reading of the case, we demonstrate how the Constitutional Court’s use of international law has endangered its own decision, as its positions are not defendable within the discipline of public international law. Therefore, while we agree with the overall outcome of the case, we argue that the Constitutional Court has strewn its own path with unnecessary obstacles and traps.","PeriodicalId":44989,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal on Human Rights","volume":"35 1","pages":"378 - 403"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02587203.2020.1745682","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45813490","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-02DOI: 10.1080/02587203.2019.1718395
Rashri Baboolal-Frank
Class Action Litigation in South Africa is the first book of its kind to be launched in South Africa. It is a contribution to knowledge for academics, practitioners, scholars, judges, lawyers and a...
{"title":"Class action litigation in South Africa","authors":"Rashri Baboolal-Frank","doi":"10.1080/02587203.2019.1718395","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02587203.2019.1718395","url":null,"abstract":"Class Action Litigation in South Africa is the first book of its kind to be launched in South Africa. It is a contribution to knowledge for academics, practitioners, scholars, judges, lawyers and a...","PeriodicalId":44989,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal on Human Rights","volume":"35 1","pages":"447 - 450"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02587203.2019.1718395","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47177415","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-07-03DOI: 10.1080/02587203.2019.1663129
Lisa Chamberlain
Costs awards are never the most exciting part of a judgment, but nevertheless have enormous significance in terms of their repercussions. This is particularly so when a litigant is a community living in poverty or a non-governmental organisation (NGO) acting in the public interest. In this context, the recent judgment in South African History Archive Trust (SAHA) v South African Reserve Bank (SARB) requires examination, as it contains a costs award against SAHA that, if allowed to stand, may bankrupt the NGO. This article will therefore introduce the case, examine the existing principles applicable to costs awards arising primarily out of the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court, and then try to understand what possible reasons might have motivated the costs award in this case.
{"title":"A costly blunder: South African History Archive Trust v The South African Reserve Bank","authors":"Lisa Chamberlain","doi":"10.1080/02587203.2019.1663129","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02587203.2019.1663129","url":null,"abstract":"Costs awards are never the most exciting part of a judgment, but nevertheless have enormous significance in terms of their repercussions. This is particularly so when a litigant is a community living in poverty or a non-governmental organisation (NGO) acting in the public interest. In this context, the recent judgment in South African History Archive Trust (SAHA) v South African Reserve Bank (SARB) requires examination, as it contains a costs award against SAHA that, if allowed to stand, may bankrupt the NGO. This article will therefore introduce the case, examine the existing principles applicable to costs awards arising primarily out of the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court, and then try to understand what possible reasons might have motivated the costs award in this case.","PeriodicalId":44989,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal on Human Rights","volume":"35 1","pages":"288 - 297"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02587203.2019.1663129","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48605922","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-07-03DOI: 10.1080/02587203.2019.1662325
Clive Vinti
This note assesses the right to mine in a ‘protected environment’ in South Africa within the prescripts of s 48 of the National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act 57 of 2003 (NEMPAA). This issue will be evaluated through a critical analysis of the High Court decision in Mining and Environmental Justice Community Network of South Africa v Minister of Environmental Affairs (hereafter, MEJCON). At the outset, it is imperative to note that a ‘protected environment’ is a type of ‘protected area’. A ‘protected area’ is defined as a precisely demarcated geographical area regulated through legal and other mechanisms to guarantee the long-term protection of the environment and the concomitant ecosystem services and cultural values. However, NEMPAA does not clearly define the meaning of the term ‘protected area’. The Act merely states that a ‘protected area’ refers to ‘any of the protected areas’ stipulated in s 9 of NEMPAA. In this regard, s 9 of NEMPAA provides a list of the ‘kinds of protected areas’, including special nature reserves, national parks, nature reserves and protected environments. In essence, a ‘protected environment’ is used to, inter alia, ‘protect the area if the area is sensitive to development due to its biological diversity; natural characteristics; scientific; cultural; historical; archaeological or geological value and scenic and landscape value provision of environmental goods and services’. According to the NEMPAA, the Minister
{"title":"The right to mine in a ‘protected area’ in South Africa: Mining and Environmental Justice Community Network of South Africa v Minister of Environmental Affairs","authors":"Clive Vinti","doi":"10.1080/02587203.2019.1662325","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02587203.2019.1662325","url":null,"abstract":"This note assesses the right to mine in a ‘protected environment’ in South Africa within the prescripts of s 48 of the National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act 57 of 2003 (NEMPAA). This issue will be evaluated through a critical analysis of the High Court decision in Mining and Environmental Justice Community Network of South Africa v Minister of Environmental Affairs (hereafter, MEJCON). At the outset, it is imperative to note that a ‘protected environment’ is a type of ‘protected area’. A ‘protected area’ is defined as a precisely demarcated geographical area regulated through legal and other mechanisms to guarantee the long-term protection of the environment and the concomitant ecosystem services and cultural values. However, NEMPAA does not clearly define the meaning of the term ‘protected area’. The Act merely states that a ‘protected area’ refers to ‘any of the protected areas’ stipulated in s 9 of NEMPAA. In this regard, s 9 of NEMPAA provides a list of the ‘kinds of protected areas’, including special nature reserves, national parks, nature reserves and protected environments. In essence, a ‘protected environment’ is used to, inter alia, ‘protect the area if the area is sensitive to development due to its biological diversity; natural characteristics; scientific; cultural; historical; archaeological or geological value and scenic and landscape value provision of environmental goods and services’. According to the NEMPAA, the Minister","PeriodicalId":44989,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal on Human Rights","volume":"35 1","pages":"311 - 322"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02587203.2019.1662325","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47436889","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-07-03DOI: 10.1080/02587203.2019.1662732
J. Sloth-Nielsen
ISSN: 0258-7203 (Print) 1996-2126 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjhr20 KOS v Minister of Home Affairs and its relevance to the law of marriage in South Africa Julia Sloth-Nielsen To cite this article: Julia Sloth-Nielsen (2019): KOSvMinisterofHomeAffairs and its relevance to the law of marriage in South Africa, South African Journal on Human Rights, DOI: 10.1080/02587203.2019.1662732 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/02587203.2019.1662732
{"title":"KOS v Minister of Home Affairs and its relevance to the law of marriage in South Africa","authors":"J. Sloth-Nielsen","doi":"10.1080/02587203.2019.1662732","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02587203.2019.1662732","url":null,"abstract":"ISSN: 0258-7203 (Print) 1996-2126 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjhr20 KOS v Minister of Home Affairs and its relevance to the law of marriage in South Africa Julia Sloth-Nielsen To cite this article: Julia Sloth-Nielsen (2019): KOSvMinisterofHomeAffairs and its relevance to the law of marriage in South Africa, South African Journal on Human Rights, DOI: 10.1080/02587203.2019.1662732 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/02587203.2019.1662732","PeriodicalId":44989,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal on Human Rights","volume":"35 1","pages":"298 - 310"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02587203.2019.1662732","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45142325","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：