ISSN: 1996-2177
Affiliations: Emeritus Professor, St Antony’s College, Oxford
Source: South African Law Journal, Volume 139 Issue 1, p. 232-250
https://doi.org/10.47348/SALJ/v139/i1a8
None
ISSN: 1996-2177
Affiliations: Emeritus Professor of Sociology, University of Cape Town
Source: South African Law Journal, Volume 139 Issue 1, p. 251-257
https://doi.org/10.47348/SALJ/v139/i1a9
None
ISSN: 1996-2193
Affiliations: Former United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
Source: Stellenbosch Law Review, Volume 32 Issue 3, 2021, p. 365 – 385
https://doi.org/10.47348/SLR/2021/i3a1
The commitment to human rights is the cornerstone of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. However, South Africa’s human rights record in the international community often stands in stark contrast to its constitutional commitment to human rights. In both international and regional contexts, South Africa has demonstrated an inconsistent approach to foreign policy that is often guided more by political considerations than by a principled commitment to advancing human rights. This lecture provides an overview of South Africa’s engagement with international human rights law in the constitutional era and evaluates its human rights record in the international arena in a diverse range of fields. These fields include South Africa’s record of human rights protection in peace and security operations on the African continent; its record as a member of the UN Security Council and Human Rights Council; the assessment of its performance by UN human rights treaty bodies; and its record in respect of the Covid-19 pandemic, international criminal justice, the death penalty, and the arms trade. The lecture draws on Judge Pillay’s extensive experience in international law, including as President of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Judge at the International Criminal Court in The Hague and former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.
ISSN: 1996-2193
Affiliations: LLB Hons, PGDip Child Sensitive Social Policies, LLM, Doctoral Researcher, South African Research Chair in Cities, Law and Environmental Sustainability, Faculty of Law, North-West University
Source: Stellenbosch Law Review, Volume 32 Issue 3, 2021, p. 386 – 409
https://doi.org/10.47348/SLR/2021/i3a2
It is becoming increasingly apparent that children are disproportionately vulnerable to environmental harm, taking into account their physical, physiological and developmental characteristics. Environmental degradation threatens children’s enjoyment of fundamental rights and freedoms, such as the right to a clean and healthy environment, the right to life, the right to health, the right to the highest attainable standard of living, and the right to dignity. This article evaluates the extent to which the South African legal framework protects the environment-related rights and interests of children. In order to achieve this objective, the article outlines the body of international and African regional human rights law and the environmental law and policy that protects and promotes the environment-related rights and interests of children. The contribution also discusses the mechanisms for redress at the international, regional and national levels in the event of environmental harm to the rights and interests of children. The body of international and African regional law sets the expectations and normative benchmarks to measure the compliance of the national (South African) legal and policy framework.
ISSN: 1996-2193
Affiliations: B lur LLB (UFS) LLD (Unisa), Professor of Private Law, University of South Africa
Source: Stellenbosch Law Review, Volume 32 Issue 3, 2021, p. 410 – 434
https://doi.org/10.47348/SLR/2021/i3a3
This article considers the question whether the right of children to consent to medical treatment includes the right to refuse medical treatment, as is the case with adult patients. If this question is answered in the affirmative, a second question arises, namely whether the protection of this right of children is as strong as the protection provided to their adult counterparts. More particularly, do children have the right to refuse medical treatment if that refusal is considered to be unreasonable or irrational by the child’s parents or doctors? If this question is answered in the negative, a third question is whether the differential approach to consent by child and adult patients is justified. In the first part of the article, the position in English law is explored. In the second part of the article, the South African legislative framework, particularly the Children’s Act 38 of 2005 and the National Health Act 61 of 2003, is considered. This is done against the background of international and regional human rights instruments and the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. The lessons learned from the developments in English law are used to suggest a way forward in South African law.