States often use their sovereignty as a justification to demand the noninterventionof other states in matters that they consider to be in theirexclusive jurisdiction. However, due to the role of regional and international organisations and the influence of universal norms and values, the present idea of state sovereignty differs greatly from the classical understanding of sovereignty as absolute. In a growing interdependent world where national boundaries are increasingly permeable, traditional notions of territoriality, independence and non-intervention are losing some of their meaning. As a result of the increasing acceptance that the protection of human rights can no longer be regarded as a purely internal matter and that the international community has a responsibility to protect, the traditional interpretation of article 2(7) of the United Nations Charter is brought into question. In addition, the relationship between the peace and security provisions of the United Nations Charter and the constitutive documents of regional organisations such as the African Union, is not completely clear. The aim of this contribution is therefore to determine to what extent a traditional or strict interpretation of article 2(7) is still relevant in regulating the international relations between states in view of these changing circumstances and, further, to establish the relationship between the United Nations Security Council and regional peace and security bodies, with specific reference to the African Union.
In terms of South African law, comparative advertising may be unlawful on two grounds, namely the common law relating to unlawful competition and infringement of a registered trade mark. Under the common law comparative advertising is generally permitted unless the advertisement contains untrue disparaging allegations. As far as trade-mark legislation is concerned, it was generally believed that comparative advertising amounted to trade-mark infringement. However, recent decisions in Europe and South Africa have introduced restrictions into the infringement provisions which limit the infringement rights of trade-mark proprietors. This article discusses these restrictions and compares the approaches adopted in Europe and South Africa and their effect on the lawfulness of comparative advertising.
Against the backdrop of a climate of fear and tension that has gripped the world since the events of 11 September 2001, as well as the legal and policy decisions being reeled out by the United States government in tackling perceived and real enemies, it becomes salutary for scholars and policymakers to reflect on the historical parallels and lessons that stand to be learned from the past. This article explores the legal and policy framework that led to the internment of some 120 000 Japanese-Americans amidst the climate of fear and tension prevalent during the World War II. Extrapolating from the critical jurisprudence emanating from the war stretching even long after the cessation of hostilities, this article attempts to highlight some of the core considerations in determining the boundaries of civil liberties and military necessity, accentuating the need for the demystification of fear, even in the ongoing state-led responses to real and imagined threats of terrorism.
The mere taking of DNA samples from someone has a direct impact on his / her private-life interests. This means that, any DNA collection and retention system that permits the indiscriminate collection of DNA samples from all suspects arrested upon any charge is constitutionally unsound. There is also no acceptable justification for the indefinite retention of such samples. DNA samples should be taken from suspects and arrested persons in terms of a warrant, and such samples, and the result of any forensic DNA analysis, should be destroyed once certain conditions have been met. It is further important that a court which finds a suspect guilty, should be the same body which orders the collection of DNA samples from that person. DNA data obtained from convicted offenders should be retained indefinitely, but provision should be made for an independent body that could consider requests to have information removed from any DNA databank.
This article examines whether the police have a constitutional duty to inform 'suspects' about their fundamental rights, despite the fact that section 35 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, is silent on this issue. The decisions of the different divisions of the South African High Court diverge on this question, and the Constitutional Court has not yet had the opportunity to settle it. In an attempt to resolve this question, this article considers the underlying principles of binding and non-binding international law standards, as well as how this is approached in the Canadian and United States' jurisdictions. This analysis reveals that an emerging consensus of opinion is developing which suggests that the informational duties should arise from the moment the police embark on an adversarial relationship with suspects, by approaching them to establish or disprove the existence of evidence linking them to a crime. The author concludes that such an approach accords with a contextual and purposive interpretation, and should be embraced.
In South Africa, pay television has been dominated by one broadcaster until the recent launch of TopTV. Thus, competition in this market sector was non-existent. Currently, television channels are sold as a bundle or package from which subscribers can choose. However, subscribers cannot choose any other channels except for the bundles or packages available. Currently consumers face the addition of new television channels to their bundles or packages which affect their subscription fees. Further, new television channels are being added to existing bundles regardless of whether subscribers want those channels or not. Therefore, consumers are deprived of their right of choice and the benefits of free and fair competition. Therefore the availability of a pay-per-channel subscription model and the ability to select channels of choice are important in order to address issues of costs, quality programming, offensive programmes and the addition of new television channels.