选择退出条款的遗漏:修订(和改进?)2017年传统法院条例草案

IF 0.2 Q4 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY South African Crime Quarterly-SACQ Pub Date : 2020-12-24 DOI:10.17159/2413-3108/2020/VN69A7821
F. Osman
{"title":"选择退出条款的遗漏:修订(和改进?)2017年传统法院条例草案","authors":"F. Osman","doi":"10.17159/2413-3108/2020/VN69A7821","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Traditional Courts Bill B1B-2017 omits the opt-out clause and the notion that engagement with traditional courts is on a voluntary and consensual basis – a long-standing sticky point with traditional leaders. Under the Bill, individuals are bound to attend a traditional court when summoned and cannot opt-out of the system, which conflicts starkly with the notion of customary law as a voluntary and consensual system of law. This article argues that compelling individuals to attend a traditional court may be unconstitutional for unjustifiably infringing the rights to culture, a fair trial and equality.","PeriodicalId":54100,"journal":{"name":"South African Crime Quarterly-SACQ","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The omission of the opt-out clause: The revised (and improved?) Traditional Courts Bill 2017\",\"authors\":\"F. Osman\",\"doi\":\"10.17159/2413-3108/2020/VN69A7821\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Traditional Courts Bill B1B-2017 omits the opt-out clause and the notion that engagement with traditional courts is on a voluntary and consensual basis – a long-standing sticky point with traditional leaders. Under the Bill, individuals are bound to attend a traditional court when summoned and cannot opt-out of the system, which conflicts starkly with the notion of customary law as a voluntary and consensual system of law. This article argues that compelling individuals to attend a traditional court may be unconstitutional for unjustifiably infringing the rights to culture, a fair trial and equality.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54100,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"South African Crime Quarterly-SACQ\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"South African Crime Quarterly-SACQ\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17159/2413-3108/2020/VN69A7821\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Crime Quarterly-SACQ","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17159/2413-3108/2020/VN69A7821","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

《传统法院法案B1B-2017》省略了选择退出条款,以及与传统法院的接触是在自愿和协商一致的基础上进行的这一概念,这是传统领导人长期以来的症结所在。根据该法案,个人在被传唤时必须出席传统法院,不能选择退出该制度,这与习惯法作为一种自愿和协商一致的法律制度的概念大相径庭。这篇文章认为,强迫个人参加传统法庭可能是违宪的,因为它不合理地侵犯了文化权、公平审判权和平等权。
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 omission of the opt-out clause: The revised (and improved?) Traditional Courts Bill 2017
The Traditional Courts Bill B1B-2017 omits the opt-out clause and the notion that engagement with traditional courts is on a voluntary and consensual basis – a long-standing sticky point with traditional leaders. Under the Bill, individuals are bound to attend a traditional court when summoned and cannot opt-out of the system, which conflicts starkly with the notion of customary law as a voluntary and consensual system of law. This article argues that compelling individuals to attend a traditional court may be unconstitutional for unjustifiably infringing the rights to culture, a fair trial and equality.
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
South African Crime Quarterly-SACQ
South African Crime Quarterly-SACQ CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
自引率
20.00%
发文量
6
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Progressive or regressive rape case law? Tshabalala v S; Ntuli v S 2020 2 SACR 38 CC Combatting violence against African foreign nationals: A criminological approach towards community safety in the KwaZulu-Natal province of South Africa Keeping them out of prison: A restorative justice education intervention with prison inmates in Lesotho ‘Bad, sad and angry’: Responses of the SAPS leadership to the dangers of policing Understanding crime using GIS and the context of COVID-19: the case of Saldanha Bay Municipality
×
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