奇怪的伙伴?通奸罪和南非人权法案

Q4 Social Sciences International Journal of Private Law Pub Date : 2014-09-23 DOI:10.1504/IJPL.2014.064925
A. Barratt
{"title":"奇怪的伙伴?通奸罪和南非人权法案","authors":"A. Barratt","doi":"10.1504/IJPL.2014.064925","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The action for adultery does not sit comfortably with the Bill of Rights in the South African Constitution, 1996. Historically, the adultery action was designed to protect the husband’s honour in the context of the European honour code. In a recent court judgement, Wiese v Moolman, the court attempted to update the remedy to conform to constitutional requirements, arguing that adultery is an infringement of inherent human dignity. This paper traces the history of the adultery remedy and its links to reflexive honour. It then examines whether the evolved action meets the requirements of the Constitution by focusing on the rights to privacy, freedom of intimate association, and human dignity as a personal autonomy right.","PeriodicalId":39023,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Private Law","volume":"7 1","pages":"310"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Strange bedfellows? The action for adultery and the South African Bill of Rights\",\"authors\":\"A. Barratt\",\"doi\":\"10.1504/IJPL.2014.064925\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The action for adultery does not sit comfortably with the Bill of Rights in the South African Constitution, 1996. Historically, the adultery action was designed to protect the husband’s honour in the context of the European honour code. In a recent court judgement, Wiese v Moolman, the court attempted to update the remedy to conform to constitutional requirements, arguing that adultery is an infringement of inherent human dignity. This paper traces the history of the adultery remedy and its links to reflexive honour. It then examines whether the evolved action meets the requirements of the Constitution by focusing on the rights to privacy, freedom of intimate association, and human dignity as a personal autonomy right.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39023,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Private Law\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"310\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-09-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Private Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPL.2014.064925\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Private Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPL.2014.064925","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

通奸罪与1996年《南非宪法》中的《权利法案》不符。从历史上看,通奸行为是为了保护欧洲荣誉法典中丈夫的荣誉而设计的。在最近的Wiese v Moolman一案中,法院试图更新补救措施以符合宪法要求,认为通奸是对人类固有尊严的侵犯。本文追溯了通奸补救的历史及其与自反性荣誉的联系。然后,通过关注隐私权、亲密结社自由和作为个人自主权的人的尊严,审查进化的行为是否符合宪法的要求。
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
Strange bedfellows? The action for adultery and the South African Bill of Rights
The action for adultery does not sit comfortably with the Bill of Rights in the South African Constitution, 1996. Historically, the adultery action was designed to protect the husband’s honour in the context of the European honour code. In a recent court judgement, Wiese v Moolman, the court attempted to update the remedy to conform to constitutional requirements, arguing that adultery is an infringement of inherent human dignity. This paper traces the history of the adultery remedy and its links to reflexive honour. It then examines whether the evolved action meets the requirements of the Constitution by focusing on the rights to privacy, freedom of intimate association, and human dignity as a personal autonomy right.
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
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
期刊最新文献
The evolution of the non-oral modification clause Legal regulation of migration policy in EU countries: current challenges The application of the concept of consideration to smart contracts on a blockchain. The propriety of mandatory arbitration in Nigeria vis-à-vis the doctrine of voluntariness: the imperativeness of charting a new course The evolution of the non-oral modification clause
×
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