南非法院下令进行科学测试以确定孩子的亲子关系的权力:强调现有差距

Rorisang Matlala, Avitus A Agbor
{"title":"南非法院下令进行科学测试以确定孩子的亲子关系的权力:强调现有差距","authors":"Rorisang Matlala, Avitus A Agbor","doi":"10.3366/ajicl.2022.0408","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Legislative reticence on the issue of compelling an unwilling or uncooperative parent and child to submit themselves for scientific test to determine the paternity of a child has sparked plenty of controversial approaches by the judiciary of South Africa: the designated authority as upper guardian of all children in the Republic. While the notion of ‘best interest of the child’ is factored in when making this determination, some courts have held that they lack such a power to make an order of that nature. Others have entertained the view that it might not be in the best interest of the child, especially when it is likely that the results of the test may prove that the alleged father is not the biological father and financial obligations may cease in this regard. In the view of another high court, discovery of the truth is also in the best interest of the child and as such the court may order such scientific tests as may be necessary. This article explores the legislative silence on the issue of ordering scientific tests. It examines the different cases in which various high courts took a different reasoning, at the end of which inconsistencies, controversies and uncertainties became the unfortunate outcome. In order to resolve this legal puzzle, especially at a time when the integrity of mothers seems to be questionable, and considering the huge financial implication it may have on those who have to pay financial support for children, the high courts may need to provide more consistency in their approach to the issue of ordering parents and children to undertake scientific tests to establish paternity. In addition, legislative reform may be needed to lay this dilemma to eternal rest.","PeriodicalId":42692,"journal":{"name":"African Journal of International and Comparative Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Power of South African Courts to Order Scientific Tests to Determine the Paternity of a Child: Highlighting the Existing Gaps\",\"authors\":\"Rorisang Matlala, Avitus A Agbor\",\"doi\":\"10.3366/ajicl.2022.0408\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Legislative reticence on the issue of compelling an unwilling or uncooperative parent and child to submit themselves for scientific test to determine the paternity of a child has sparked plenty of controversial approaches by the judiciary of South Africa: the designated authority as upper guardian of all children in the Republic. While the notion of ‘best interest of the child’ is factored in when making this determination, some courts have held that they lack such a power to make an order of that nature. Others have entertained the view that it might not be in the best interest of the child, especially when it is likely that the results of the test may prove that the alleged father is not the biological father and financial obligations may cease in this regard. In the view of another high court, discovery of the truth is also in the best interest of the child and as such the court may order such scientific tests as may be necessary. This article explores the legislative silence on the issue of ordering scientific tests. It examines the different cases in which various high courts took a different reasoning, at the end of which inconsistencies, controversies and uncertainties became the unfortunate outcome. In order to resolve this legal puzzle, especially at a time when the integrity of mothers seems to be questionable, and considering the huge financial implication it may have on those who have to pay financial support for children, the high courts may need to provide more consistency in their approach to the issue of ordering parents and children to undertake scientific tests to establish paternity. In addition, legislative reform may be needed to lay this dilemma to eternal rest.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42692,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"African Journal of International and Comparative Law\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"African Journal of International and Comparative Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3366/ajicl.2022.0408\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African Journal of International and Comparative Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3366/ajicl.2022.0408","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在强迫不情愿或不合作的父母和孩子接受科学测试以确定孩子的父亲身份的问题上,立法上的沉默引发了南非司法部门的许多有争议的做法:指定当局是共和国所有儿童的最高监护人。虽然在做出这一决定时考虑到了“儿童最大利益”的概念,但一些法院认为,他们缺乏制定这种性质的命令的权力。其他人则认为,这可能不符合孩子的最大利益,尤其是当检测结果可能证明被指控的父亲不是亲生父亲,并且在这方面的经济义务可能停止时。另一家高等法院认为,发现真相也符合儿童的最大利益,因此,法院可以下令进行必要的科学测试。本文探讨了在下令进行科学测试问题上的立法沉默。它审查了不同的案件,在这些案件中,不同的高等法院采取了不同的推理,最终矛盾、争议和不确定性成为了不幸的结果。为了解决这一法律难题,尤其是在母亲的诚信似乎值得怀疑的时候,并考虑到这可能对那些必须为孩子支付经济支持的人产生巨大的经济影响,高等法院可能需要在命令父母和子女进行科学测试以确定亲子关系的问题上提供更多的一致性。此外,可能需要进行立法改革,以使这一困境得到永久解决。
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
The Power of South African Courts to Order Scientific Tests to Determine the Paternity of a Child: Highlighting the Existing Gaps
Legislative reticence on the issue of compelling an unwilling or uncooperative parent and child to submit themselves for scientific test to determine the paternity of a child has sparked plenty of controversial approaches by the judiciary of South Africa: the designated authority as upper guardian of all children in the Republic. While the notion of ‘best interest of the child’ is factored in when making this determination, some courts have held that they lack such a power to make an order of that nature. Others have entertained the view that it might not be in the best interest of the child, especially when it is likely that the results of the test may prove that the alleged father is not the biological father and financial obligations may cease in this regard. In the view of another high court, discovery of the truth is also in the best interest of the child and as such the court may order such scientific tests as may be necessary. This article explores the legislative silence on the issue of ordering scientific tests. It examines the different cases in which various high courts took a different reasoning, at the end of which inconsistencies, controversies and uncertainties became the unfortunate outcome. In order to resolve this legal puzzle, especially at a time when the integrity of mothers seems to be questionable, and considering the huge financial implication it may have on those who have to pay financial support for children, the high courts may need to provide more consistency in their approach to the issue of ordering parents and children to undertake scientific tests to establish paternity. In addition, legislative reform may be needed to lay this dilemma to eternal rest.
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
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
期刊最新文献
An Evaluation of South Africa's Maternity and Parental Benefits Legislation in Light of the International Labour Organisation's Maternity Protection Convention and Recommendation Front matter The Supreme Court of Uganda and the Right to Bail Pending Appeal: Understanding Nakiwuge Racheal Muleke v Uganda (Criminal Reference No.12 Of 2020) (9 September 2021) Corporate Accountability to Local Communities for Investment-Related Harms: The Elusive Promise of Balanced Investment Treaties The Igiogbe Custom as a Mandatory Norm in Conflict of Laws: An Exploration of Nigerian Appellate Court Decisions
×
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