社论:审判的人工制品:约翰-弗罗曼法官

K. van Marle, Elmien Du Plessis
{"title":"社论:审判的人工制品:约翰-弗罗曼法官","authors":"K. van Marle, Elmien Du Plessis","doi":"10.17159/1727-3781/2024/v27i0a17876","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Early in the Constitutional era, in Qozeleni v Minister of Law and Order 1994 3 SA 625 (E) Justice Johan Froneman called for the \"rubicon … to be crossed out not only intellectually, but also emotionally before the interpretation and application of the … Constitution is fully to come into its own right\". He further argued for the Constitution \"to become … a living document\".\nIn his many judgements in a judicial career spanning 25 years, Justice Froneman suggested some of what such a crossing of the Rubicon could entail. He also gave meaning to the idea of the Constitution as a living document. The contributions in this special edition unpack, reflect on, evaluate and further the work of and themes tackled by Justice Froneman.\nJustice Johan Froneman retired from the Constitutional Court in 2020. He was appointed to the Constitutional Court in 2009 after serving as Judge of the Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown (1994-2009); Deputy Judge President of the Labour Court and Labour Appeal Court (1996-1999) and two terms in 2002 acting on the Supreme Court of Appeal.\nIn 1999 he was a visitor at Harvard University by invitation of Professor Frank Michelman. He was also Extraordinary Professor in Public Law at Stellenbosch University (2003-2008) and a Visitor at the Centre for Socio-Legal Studies, University of Oxford, in 2008. He is currently an extraordinary professor in the Department of Public Law, University of the Free State. He has delivered judgements in a wide range of cases. Of particular interest is his careful deliberation on issues pertaining to transformation, legal interpretation, property and language. Justice Froneman in his many carefully argued judgements displayed not only the intellectual rigour that he was calling for, but also the emotional and very much personal crossing that he referred to in 1994.","PeriodicalId":55857,"journal":{"name":"Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal","volume":"98 20","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Editorial: Artifacts of judging: Justice Johan Froneman\",\"authors\":\"K. van Marle, Elmien Du Plessis\",\"doi\":\"10.17159/1727-3781/2024/v27i0a17876\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Early in the Constitutional era, in Qozeleni v Minister of Law and Order 1994 3 SA 625 (E) Justice Johan Froneman called for the \\\"rubicon … to be crossed out not only intellectually, but also emotionally before the interpretation and application of the … Constitution is fully to come into its own right\\\". He further argued for the Constitution \\\"to become … a living document\\\".\\nIn his many judgements in a judicial career spanning 25 years, Justice Froneman suggested some of what such a crossing of the Rubicon could entail. He also gave meaning to the idea of the Constitution as a living document. The contributions in this special edition unpack, reflect on, evaluate and further the work of and themes tackled by Justice Froneman.\\nJustice Johan Froneman retired from the Constitutional Court in 2020. He was appointed to the Constitutional Court in 2009 after serving as Judge of the Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown (1994-2009); Deputy Judge President of the Labour Court and Labour Appeal Court (1996-1999) and two terms in 2002 acting on the Supreme Court of Appeal.\\nIn 1999 he was a visitor at Harvard University by invitation of Professor Frank Michelman. He was also Extraordinary Professor in Public Law at Stellenbosch University (2003-2008) and a Visitor at the Centre for Socio-Legal Studies, University of Oxford, in 2008. He is currently an extraordinary professor in the Department of Public Law, University of the Free State. He has delivered judgements in a wide range of cases. Of particular interest is his careful deliberation on issues pertaining to transformation, legal interpretation, property and language. Justice Froneman in his many carefully argued judgements displayed not only the intellectual rigour that he was calling for, but also the emotional and very much personal crossing that he referred to in 1994.\",\"PeriodicalId\":55857,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"98 20\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2024/v27i0a17876\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2024/v27i0a17876","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在宪法时代的早期,在 Qozeleni 诉法律和秩序部部长 1994 3 SA 625 (E) 一案中,Johan Froneman 大法官呼吁 "在解释和适用......宪法之前,不仅要在理智上,而且要在情感上跨越......卢比孔"。弗罗曼大法官在其长达 25 年的司法生涯中做出了许多判决,他提出了跨越卢比肯河可能带来的一些问题。他还赋予了宪法作为 "活文件 "这一概念以意义。约翰-弗罗曼大法官于 2020 年从宪法法院退休。他于 2009 年被任命为宪法法院法官,此前曾担任格拉汉姆斯敦东开普省高等法院法官(1994-2009 年)、劳工法院和劳工上诉法院副院长(1996-1999 年)以及 2002 年在最高上诉法院担任两届代理法官。1999 年,应弗兰克-米歇尔曼教授的邀请,他担任哈佛大学访问学者。他还曾担任斯泰伦博斯大学公法特聘教授(2003-2008 年),并于 2008 年担任牛津大学社会法律研究中心访问学者。目前,他是自由州大学公法系特聘教授。他曾对大量案件做出判决。他对转型、法律解释、财产和语言等相关问题的仔细斟酌尤其引人关注。弗罗曼大法官在他许多经过仔细论证的判决中,不仅表现出他所要求的严谨的智力,而且还表现出他在 1994 年提到的情感和非常个人化的跨越。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Editorial: Artifacts of judging: Justice Johan Froneman
Early in the Constitutional era, in Qozeleni v Minister of Law and Order 1994 3 SA 625 (E) Justice Johan Froneman called for the "rubicon … to be crossed out not only intellectually, but also emotionally before the interpretation and application of the … Constitution is fully to come into its own right". He further argued for the Constitution "to become … a living document". In his many judgements in a judicial career spanning 25 years, Justice Froneman suggested some of what such a crossing of the Rubicon could entail. He also gave meaning to the idea of the Constitution as a living document. The contributions in this special edition unpack, reflect on, evaluate and further the work of and themes tackled by Justice Froneman. Justice Johan Froneman retired from the Constitutional Court in 2020. He was appointed to the Constitutional Court in 2009 after serving as Judge of the Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown (1994-2009); Deputy Judge President of the Labour Court and Labour Appeal Court (1996-1999) and two terms in 2002 acting on the Supreme Court of Appeal. In 1999 he was a visitor at Harvard University by invitation of Professor Frank Michelman. He was also Extraordinary Professor in Public Law at Stellenbosch University (2003-2008) and a Visitor at the Centre for Socio-Legal Studies, University of Oxford, in 2008. He is currently an extraordinary professor in the Department of Public Law, University of the Free State. He has delivered judgements in a wide range of cases. Of particular interest is his careful deliberation on issues pertaining to transformation, legal interpretation, property and language. Justice Froneman in his many carefully argued judgements displayed not only the intellectual rigour that he was calling for, but also the emotional and very much personal crossing that he referred to in 1994.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
67
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊介绍: PELJ/PER publishes contributions relevant to development in the South African constitutional state. This means that most contributions will concern some aspect of constitutionalism or legal development. The fact that the South African constitutional state is the focus, does not limit the content of PELJ/PER to the South African legal system, since development law and constitutionalism are excellent themes for comparative work. Contributions on any aspect or discipline of the law from any part of the world are thus welcomed.
期刊最新文献
Artificial Intelligence and Blockchain Technologies in Online Dispute Resolution: A Solution to Consumer Disputes in South Africa? Safeguarding the Rights of Children Living in Kinship Care in South Africa "Cause of Action": How Could the Supreme Court of Appeal Get it so Wrong? Olesitse v Minister of Police (SCA) (Unreported) Case No: 470/2021 of 15 June 2022 Navigating Reputational Risks: Cautionary Considerations for South African Banks in the Unilateral Termination of Bank-Customer Relationships An Overview of the Extent of the Powers of South African Competition Authorities in the Regulation of Price Discrimination under the Competition Act 89 of 1998 in the Context of Digital Transformation
×
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