1887

n Journal for Juridical Science - Institutional independence and the constitutionality of legislation establishing lower courts and tribunals : part II

USD

 

Abstract

<b>Institusionele onafhanklikheid en die grondwetlikheid van wetgewing vir die skepping van laer howe en tribunale : deel II</b> <br>Die eerste gedeelte van hierdie artikel handel oor die grondwetlike oorsprong en beginsels van geregtelike onafhanklikheid. Hierdie beginsels vorm die grondslae waarteen die grondwetlikheid van sekere wetgewende prosesse getoets word. In hierdie verband is regspraak wat handel oor die grondwetlikheid van:wetgewing wat sekere administratiewe instansies daarstel, krygsverhore en streekshowe waarin leke tradisionele leiers voorsit, bespreek. Die tweede deel van hierdie artikel ondersoek die hoogs kontroversiële vraag met betrekking tot die grondwetlikheid van die wetgewende raamwerk waarbinne streekslandroshowe in Suid-Afrika ingestel is (teen die agtergrond van 'n grondwetlike waarborg van geregtelike onafhanklikheid). Die saak onder bespreking is <i>Van Rooyen and Others v The State and Others (General Counsel of the Bar Intervening)</I>, waar die Konstitutionele Hof, in teenstelling met die verhoorregter, 'n doeldienende benadering by die interprestasie van die grondwetlike vrae aangewend het.

The first part of this article dealt with the constitutional origins and principles of judicial independence.Those principles form the bases upon which the constitutionality of certain legislative schemes were tested. In that regard, we discussed case law where legislation establishing administrative agencies; the Court Martial; and the regional authority courts presided over by lay traditional chiefs, was challenged for unconstitutionality. The second part of this article examines the hotly-contested question of the constitutionality of the legislative framework under which Regional Magistrates Courts in South Africa were established against the backdrop of the constitutional guarantee of judicial independence. The case for discussion is <I>Van Rooyen & Others v State & Others (General Council of the Bar of South Africa Intervening) &lt;/I&gt; where the Constitutional Court, unlike the trial judge, applied a purposive approach to the interpretation of the constitutional questions posed.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/juridic/29/3/EJC55539
2004-01-01
2016-12-04
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