Law, Democracy & Development - Volume 11, Issue 1, 2007
Volumes & issues
Volume 11, Issue 1, 2007
Source: Law, Democracy & Development 11, pp XV –XIX (2007)More Less
Ce numéro de LDD est mémorable pour deux raisons. La première est que nous fêtons nos dix ans de publication et que nous abordons les dix prochaines années. Tant de choses se sont déroulées dans le domaine du développementsocio-juridique durant cette période et cela a été reflété dans les pages LDD. Les articles publiés, la plupart rédigés par d'éminents spécialistes locaux et internationaux, ont souvent été d'une qualité exceptionnelle et sont cités très régulièrement. Afin de rendre ce corpus de recherche et d'analyse plus accessible, un index des dix dernières années a été réalisé avec les references de tous les articles qui ont été publiés depuis notre premier numéro en mai 1997. Cet index sera distribué à tous nos abonnés.
Source: Law, Democracy & Development 11, pp XI –XIV (2007)More Less
This issue of LDD is memorable for two reasons. First, it marks the end of our first decade of publication and the start of the second. Much has happened in the field of socio-legal development during this period, and much of it has been reflected in the pages of LDD. The articles, many by leading national and international experts, were often of outstanding quality and are being cited with increasing regularity. To make this body of research and analysis more accessible, a ten-year index has been compiled with details of all articles published since the first issue in May 1997. This will be distributed to all subscribers.
Author John C. MubangiziSource: Law, Democracy & Development 11, pp 1 –14 (2007)More Less
Poverty is not new. It is not a recent affliction of humankind. It has always been with us. In that regard, I have argued elsewhere that of all the social phenomena that have a significant impact on human rights, poverty probably ranks highest. Some have actually argued that poverty is in itself a violation of human rights.
Loss of earning capacity : the difference between the sum-formula approach and the 'somehow-or-other' approachAuthor Daleen MillardSource: Law, Democracy & Development 11, pp 15 –32 (2007)More Less
When instituting a delictual claim for loss of earning capacity, an individual needs to submit evidence on a number of matters. The court is called upon to weigh the evidence and make an appropriate award. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the terminology employed, to explain the two different ways in which earning capacity is calculated and to illustrate how South African courts not only confuse terms with each other and use them interchangeably, but also that there is no consistent approach to the way in which loss of earning capacity is calculated. Finally it will be argued that it is time to address this matter, possibly by looking at other areas of the law, such as social security law. Although the current social security system can probably not provide solutions to all the problems mentioned in this article, an integrated approach to loss of earning capacity is urgently needed and the new social security system might just add a much needed new dimension to the way in which jurists approach this area of the law.
Source: Law, Democracy & Development 11, pp 33 –51 (2007)More Less
South Africa faces a number of critical challenges, most notably poverty, unemployment and income inequality. The concept of the country having two economies - the first being 'an advanced, sophisticated economy, based on skilled labour, which is becoming more globally competitive' and the second being 'a mainly informal, marginalised and unskilled economy, populated by the unemployed and those unemployable in the formal sector' - nicely captures the structural consequences of these problems. Certainly, this deep division is a long way from government's vision of a 'prosperous, equitable, stable and democratic society [and]...of decent work and living standards for all'.
Author Kitty MalherbeSource: Law, Democracy & Development 11, pp 53 –68 (2007)More Less
In 2001 the Ministerial Report on Abuse, Neglect and Ill-treatment of Older Persons ('Mothers and Fathers of the Nation: The Forgotten People') gave horrific accounts of older persons suffering neglect and abuse in residential care, in their communities and in their family homes. The long-awaited Older Persons Bill 68 of 2003 and the resultant Older Persons Act 13 of 2006 promised to provide the regulatory framework within which older persons would receive the care and protection they deserve.
The aim of this article is to trace the legislative and policy developments from the Aged Persons Act of 1967 up to the Older Persons Act 13 of 2006. The Older Persons Act is compared to the Aged Persons Act to determine whether the former truly can live up to its promise as all-inclusive legislation regulating the protection and care of older persons, or whether it has ended up being merely its predecessor cloaked in more politically correct terms. In particular, it will be argued that the lack of express enforcement mechanisms detracts from the significant advance in the protection of older persons created by the rights-based approach introduced by the Older Persons Act.
Author Nomagugu HlongwaneSource: Law, Democracy & Development 11, pp 69 –84 (2007)More Less
At present, unequal pay for work of equal value is indirectly regulated by the Employment Equity Act which aims to promote equality in the workplace. The Act does not expressly prohibit the unequal pay for work of equal value but merely prohibits discriminatory practices, including unequal pay and separate pension funds for different race groups in the company. It will be argued that South Africa requires legislation governing unequal pay for work of equal value. The research reflected in this paper suggests that no struggle for equal pay will be successful unless express provisions for pay equity are included in legislation.
Source: Law, Democracy & Development 11, pp 85 –90 (2007)More Less
On the eve of this anniversary of Human Rights Day I want to share with you a few observations on human rights in the context of 'continuity and change'. In particular, we must question whether the very notions of 'continuity' and 'change' do not exist in contradiction to each other. Before 1994, definitions appeared to be rather simple - 'they' were the oppressive regime and 'we' the human rights activists. The battle was contested on every possible terrain from the barricades to the pulpits, the courts, the factory floor, the sports field, through the armed struggle and on every available international platform; and we won. 'We' were distinguished by the fact that we held the moral high ground and 'they' were just simply bad. Definitions were easy and the world quite uncomplicated.
Source: Law, Democracy & Development 11, pp 91 –97 (2007)More Less
À la veille de la commémoration de la Journée des Droits de l'Homme et de la Personne, j'aimerais partager avec vous quelques observations sur ceux-ci dans le contexte de la (continuité et du changement). Nous devons nous demander en particulier si les notions mêmes de (continuité) et de (changement) n'existent en contradiction l'une de l'autre. Avant 1994, les définitions semblaient être simples : (ils) étaient les membres d'un régime d'oppression et (nous) étions des militants pour les droits de l'homme. La bataille se déroulait sur tous les fronts possibles, des barricades jusqu'aux amphithéâtres des facultés, dans les tribunaux, dans les usines, sur les terrains de sport, les armes à la main, et dans tous les forums internationaux à notre disposition ; nous avons gagné cette bataille. (Nous) étions fiers du fait que nous étions des êtres moraux et qu' (ils) étaient simplement les (méchants). Les définitions étaient aisées à établir et le monde autour de nous simple à appréhender.
Fair trial rights, freedom of the press, the principle of 'open justice' and the power of the Supreme Court of Appeal to regulate its own process : South African Broadcasting Corporation Ltd v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Others 2007 (2) BCLR 167 (CC)Author Wium De VilliersSource: Law, Democracy & Development 11, pp 99 –108 (2007)More Less
One Mr Shaik was convicted in the Durban High Court on several counts relating to corruption with regards to payments he had made to the former Deputy President Mr Jacob Zuma and that he had bribed Mr Zuma to protect a French armaments company. Several companies which Mr Shaik controls, or in which he has a major interest, were also convicted. Mr Shaik and the companies sought leave to appeal against the convictions by the High Court to the Supreme Court of Appeal. Mr Shaik also sought leave to appeal against an order of civil forfeiture granted by the High Court in terms of the Prevention of Organised Crime Act 121 of 1998.
Before the proceedings commenced the applicant informally requested permission from the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Appeal to broadcast the proceedings. The Registrar, in line with the practice of the Supreme Court of Appeal, informed the applicant that visual recordings only without sound would be allowed. The applicant then made formal application to the Supreme Court of Appeal to broadcast the entire proceedings live on television and radio, as well as the right to produce edited highlights packages for television and radio audiences.