Please use the search button to find topics of interest. After searching, click on "most recent" to see recent additions.
CSPRI Newsletter No. 7 - October 2004
Author: hannes
Published: Oct 26, 2004

This issue consists of the following articles: Review of the Correctional Services Budget 2004/5 to 2006/7, written by Lukas Muntingh; Milestones reached for the establishment of a human rights basis for corrections, written by Prof. Julia Sloth-Nielsen (published in the Mail and Guardian, 10-17 September 2004; SA Prisons at a glance (February 2004 to May 2004)

State Violence in Benin
Author: Jean
Published: Oct 11, 2004

Alternative report to the Committee on Human Rights. Association des Femmes Juristes du Bénin, Enfants Solidaires d'Afrique et du Monde, Human Rights Task Group, & Organisation Mondiale contre la torture.

Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services Report: Solutions & Recommendations to Prison Overcrowding
Author: calitz
Published: Sep 07, 2004

The problem of overcrowding within the South African prison system has been identified as a key challenge, which negatively affects the ability of the Department of Correctional Service (DCS) to rehabilitate offenders. The first objective of the report is to describe the main causes and consequences of overcrowding. Secondly, is to highlight some of the current initiatives to address the problem of overcrowding in prisons. Lastly, the report seeks to identify specific recommendations by the Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services to alleviate prison overcrowding.

The Republic v Gorman and Others (2004) AHRLR 141 (GhSC 2004)
Author: Jean
Published: Jul 07, 2004

"Drawing on our general analysis of the law above, we summarize our holdings as follows: 1. The constitutional presumption of innocence embedded in article 19(2)(c) of the 1992 Constitution does not import an automatic right to bail. 2. The constitutional duty of the Court under article 14(4) of the Constitution, to grant bail to the accused if he is not tried within a reasonable time, is applicable irrespective of the nature of the accusation or the severity of the punishment upon conviction. 3. In the cases falling outside the direct duty to grant bail under 14(4), there is a constitutional presumption of grant of bail drawn from the spirit of the language of articles 14(1) and (3), and 19(2)(c), in further protection of persons charged with offences in situations which do not mandate the grant of bail. 4. The said constitutional presumption of grant of bail is rebuttable; and it is in fact rebutted by a statutory provision that expressly disallows bail, such as the circumstances outlined in section 96(7) of the Criminal Procedure Code. 5. Outside the strictures of section 96(7) of the Code and article 14(4) of the Constitution, the presumption of the grant of bail is still extant, and is exercised under judicial discretion which is itself fettered by other provisions of section 96. 6. There is no prima facie inconsistency between the relevant provisions of the Code and the 1992 Constitution. 7. Considerations of the nature of an accusation and the severity of punishment upon conviction, as part of the decision not to grant bail under section 96(5) and (6), are constitutional; and that the gravity of an offence may be viewed as an aid in understanding and categorizing the nature of an accusation. 8. The Court of Appeal, in arriving at its judgment of 3 March, 2004 to rescind bail in this matter, at variance with the judgment in the Benneh case to grant bail, did not violate the constitutional provision on stare decisis; and 9. The Supreme Court is not bound by the specific result of the Benneh case since the factual contexts are distinguishable.

CSPRI Newsletter No. 6 - June 2004
Author: hannes
Published: Jun 26, 2004

In this issue: Prof. Julia Sloth-Nielsen writes about Parole and the separation of powers: the implications of S v Botha (Case no 318/03)

Report on the evaluation of the Independent Prison Visitors System
Author: calitz
Published: May 13, 2004

The report provides a detailed analysis and evaluation of the Independent Prison Visitors (IPV) system of the Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services (JICS). Recommendations focus on the appointment process of IPVs; the performance management system for IPVs; the quality of feed-back given to prisoners; the training of IPVs; Interaction between IPVs and DCS officials; additional IPVs or the allocation of more time; Interaction with prisoners and work outside mandated duties, and political oversight.

Review of the Judicial Inspectorate of Prisons of SA
Author: calitz
Published: May 13, 2004

This report provides a detailed analysis of the legal mandate and powers of JICS. A number of recommendations are made to enhance its independence, efficiency and effectiveness.

© 2019 Dullah Omar Institute | CMS Website by Juizi
Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions