1887

n South African Journal of Criminal Justice - A comparison of South African and Canadian anti-terrorism legislation

USD

 

Abstract

South Africa's Protection of Constitutional Democracy against Terrorist and Related Activities Act 33 of 2004 is compared with Canada's Anti-Terrorism Act, 2001. The processes that led to the enactment of the two laws and the packaging and preambles of both laws are examined. The definitions of terrorist activities in both laws are compared, as are the fault elements in various offences related to terrorism. South Africa's extensive use of negligence or <I>culpa</I> liability is contrasted with Canada's use of subjective fault and various constitutional arguments concerning the necessity for subjective fault for terrorism are examined. South Africa's duty to report offence is compared with the comparable Canadian offence, and investigative hearings and powers in terrorism cases in both countries are examined with an emphasis on prior judicial authorization and a presumption of publicity. The process for the listing of terrorist groups in both countries is also compared. Conclusions are drawn that, while more limited in scope than the Canadian law, South Africa's new anti-terrorism law has a broader defi nition of terrorism, lower fault levels, a broader duty to report offence and less restrained investigative powers.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/ju_sajcj/18/2/EJC52846
2005-01-01
2016-12-08
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error