博茨瓦纳同性恋权利的新曙光——高等法院和上诉法院对莫特希迪芒案的裁决述评

IF 0.3 4区 社会学 Q3 LAW Journal of African Law Pub Date : 2023-07-03 DOI:10.1017/s0021855323000177
Gosego Rockfall Lekgowe
{"title":"博茨瓦纳同性恋权利的新曙光——高等法院和上诉法院对莫特希迪芒案的裁决述评","authors":"Gosego Rockfall Lekgowe","doi":"10.1017/s0021855323000177","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In 2003, the Botswanan Court of Appeal decided in Kanane v The State that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation was not proscribed by the Botswanan Constitution because no evidence had been adduced showing that the society of Botswana was ready for gay individuals. After sixteen years, things changed: in 2019, in Letsweletse Motshidiemang and LEGABIBO (as amicus) v The Attorney General, the High Court held that the law criminalizing anal intercourse violated the fundamental rights of gay people. In 2021, the Court of Appeal upheld the High Court decision. This commentary briefly examines these three decisions. It argues that Kanane gave too much weight to public opinion to the detriment of constitutional interpretation. Through a robust approach to generous interpretation of fundamental rights, the Motshidiemang decisions partly remedied the flaw in Kanane. However, judicial clarification is still required on some aspects of the decision.","PeriodicalId":44630,"journal":{"name":"Journal of African Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A New Dawn for Gay Rights in Botswana: A Commentary on the Decision of the High Court and Court of Appeal in the Motshidiemang cases\",\"authors\":\"Gosego Rockfall Lekgowe\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s0021855323000177\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract In 2003, the Botswanan Court of Appeal decided in Kanane v The State that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation was not proscribed by the Botswanan Constitution because no evidence had been adduced showing that the society of Botswana was ready for gay individuals. After sixteen years, things changed: in 2019, in Letsweletse Motshidiemang and LEGABIBO (as amicus) v The Attorney General, the High Court held that the law criminalizing anal intercourse violated the fundamental rights of gay people. In 2021, the Court of Appeal upheld the High Court decision. This commentary briefly examines these three decisions. It argues that Kanane gave too much weight to public opinion to the detriment of constitutional interpretation. Through a robust approach to generous interpretation of fundamental rights, the Motshidiemang decisions partly remedied the flaw in Kanane. However, judicial clarification is still required on some aspects of the decision.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44630,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of African Law\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of African Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0021855323000177\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of African Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0021855323000177","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

2003年,博茨瓦纳上诉法院在Kanane诉the State一案中裁定,博茨瓦纳宪法不禁止基于性取向的歧视,因为没有任何证据表明博茨瓦纳社会已经为同性恋者做好了准备。16年后,情况发生了变化:2019年,在Letsweletse Motshidiemang和LEGABIBO(作为法庭之友)诉司法部长一案中,高等法院认为,将肛交定为犯罪的法律侵犯了同性恋者的基本权利。2021年,上诉法院维持了高等法院的裁决。本评注简要审查了这三项决定。它认为,卡纳内过于重视公众舆论,损害了宪法解释。Motshidiemang的裁决通过对基本权利的有力解释,在一定程度上弥补了Kanane的缺陷。然而,仍然需要对该决定的某些方面作出司法澄清。
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
A New Dawn for Gay Rights in Botswana: A Commentary on the Decision of the High Court and Court of Appeal in the Motshidiemang cases
Abstract In 2003, the Botswanan Court of Appeal decided in Kanane v The State that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation was not proscribed by the Botswanan Constitution because no evidence had been adduced showing that the society of Botswana was ready for gay individuals. After sixteen years, things changed: in 2019, in Letsweletse Motshidiemang and LEGABIBO (as amicus) v The Attorney General, the High Court held that the law criminalizing anal intercourse violated the fundamental rights of gay people. In 2021, the Court of Appeal upheld the High Court decision. This commentary briefly examines these three decisions. It argues that Kanane gave too much weight to public opinion to the detriment of constitutional interpretation. Through a robust approach to generous interpretation of fundamental rights, the Motshidiemang decisions partly remedied the flaw in Kanane. However, judicial clarification is still required on some aspects of the decision.
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
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
期刊最新文献
Legal Barriers to Women's Access to Elected Parliamentary Seats in Light of 30 Years of Multiparty Democracy in Tanzania Prohibiting Political Party Membership as a Condition for Receiving Political Service Retirement Benefits under Ethiopian Law: A Comparison with Kenya and Tanzania An Assessment of the Doctrine of Commorientes and Its Implications for the Devolution of Testate and Intestate Property in Ghana Custom Versus Customary Law: Does South African Jurisprudence Draw the Distinction? Women, Climate Change and the Law: Lessons for Tanzania from an Analysis of African Nationally Determined Contributions
×
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