In this contribution the current legal developments in Bophuthatswana, Ciskei, Lesotho, Malawi, South Africa, South West Africa/Namibia, Swaziland, Transkei, Venda and Zimbabwe with regards to principal legislation, government notices and judicial decisions are briefly descriptionbed.
Looking back over the past three years, one can see, relatively clearly, the contributions and limitations of the Bill of Rights implemented in Namibia. The utility of a Bill is defined in structural-functional terms by the extent to which it provides a transcendent, normative frame of reference accepted by all the significant interest groups in a particular society, as an acceptable set of parameters for individual, group and governmental behaviour. There was - and still is - no realistic possibility in the short term of establishing the Bill of Rights as a normative model for Namibian society at large; the fact of cultural disparity and the hold of tribal bonds and loyalties on a large part of the population preclude this. The political elites which formed the Multi-Party Conference and later the transitional government, have however, despite their origins in a diverse array of cultural traditions and ideologies, regarded themselves as bound by the Bill they jointly forged. Both in the security field and in the course of their disputes about constitutional questions, the Bill has served as a common frame of reference.
In the case of in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) we are dealing with a more complex ethico-legal as well as a factually more multidimensional situation than is usual in the traditional doctor-patient relationship. Above and beyond this "bilateral relationship" we must also consider the welfare of the prospective child. Thus, in effect, we have a problem with "three corners", all of which need to be considered.
The extreme conservatism which pervades English judicial decisions of the last two years has many implications which are unattractive from a policy standpoint. The Commonwealth judicial experience is of some comparative interest, in so far as it suggests the usefulness of a variety of mediating techniques which make possible a more satisfying compromise between conflicting policy objectives. The developing law in several jurisdictions offers insights into the viability of conceptual controls which can be made use of to extenuate the harshness of an absolute principle of non-liability and yet to forestall the risk of unbounded liability. This article addresses alternative approaches to the problem with a view to assessing their soundness in relation to modern social and commercial requirements.
The principle of tripartism applies to both the International Labour Conference and the Governing Body of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). The term in the context of the ILO, refers to the constitutional requirement that government representatives participate on an equal footing with workers' and employers' representatives. Tripartism manifests itself at meetings of the two bodies. Each of the workers' group, employers' group and government delegates tend to speak with one voice. Tripartism has also been extended to committees. The conference is the legislative body. Its functions include the adoption of conventions and recommendations. The functions of the Governing Body, which is the executive organ, include the consideration of representations and complaints against member states for failure to implement conventions which they have ratified, the recommendation of action to be taken against a member which does not take the necessary action regarding the implementation of conventions, the response to recommendations of a commission of inquiry or a decision of the International Court of Justice concerning a complaint, and the drafting of the rules concerning the powers, functions and procedure of regional conferences.