This would not be achieved by depersonalising and executing murderers, even as a deterrent to others. Having committed to a society premised on the recognition and realisation of human rights, the State was required to value these two rights above all others, and to demonstrate that valuation in everything it did, including the punishment of criminals. The Court held further that the rights to life and dignity were the most important of all human rights and the source of all the other personal rights detailed in Chapter 3 of the Interim Constitution. Race and poverty are also alleged to be factors.
#S v makwanyane zacc trial#
The outcome may be dependent upon factors such as the way the case is investigated by the police, the way the case is presented by the prosecutor, how effectively the accused is defended, the personality and particular attitude to capital punishment of the trial judge and, if the matter goes on appeal, the particular judges who are selected to hear the case. The Court held that, in practice, there was an element of chance at every stage of the process of implementing the death penalty: Delivered on 6 June, this was the newly established court's "first politically important and publicly controversial holding." The court also forbade the government from carrying out the death sentence on any prisoners awaiting execution, ruling that they should remain in prison until new sentences were imposed. The court's ruling invalidated section 277(1)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977, which had provided for use of the death penalty, along with any similar provisions in any other law in force in South Africa.
It established that capital punishment was inconsistent with the commitment to human rights expressed in the Interim Constitution. S v Makwanyane and Another (CCT 3/94) was a landmark 1995 judgement of the Constitutional Court of South Africa. The death penalty is inconsistent with the Interim Constitution the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Act, or any other law, sanctioning capital punishment are invalid.Ĭhaskalson P, Ackermann, Didcott, Kriegler, Langa, Madala, Mahomed, Mokgoro, O'Regan & Sachs JJ, Kentridge AJĬapital punishment, human rights, constitutional law Referral from Appellate Division ZASCA 76
0 kommentar(er)
