Understanding one’s rights when arrested and detained: An assessment of language barriers that affect comprehension

by | Jun 6, 2021 | SACJ, SACJ V34 I1 2021

Understanding one’s rights when arrested and detained: An assessment of language barriers that affect comprehension

Author Terrence R Carney

ISSN: 1996-2118
Affiliations: BA HonsBA (UP) PGCE (Unisa) MA (UP) PhD (UFS) TESOL (Wits), Associate Professor, College of Human Sciences, University of South Africa
Source: South African Journal of Criminal Justice, Volume 34 Issue 1, p. 1 – 30
https://doi.org/10.47348/SACJ/v34/i1a1

 

Abstract

Difficult text formulations, on the one hand, as well as poor linguistic skills and comprehension on the other, can severely hamper the communication effort of basic human rights during the judicial process. The rights entrenched in s 35 of the Constitution of South Africa (Act 108 of 1996), as they apply to individuals who are arrested, detained and accused, and read out by a member of the local South African Police Service (SAPS), are written in a legal register that can be too difficult for additional language speakers to understand. This begs the question of whether arrested, detained and accused individuals are fully aware of their rights and whether they can exercise these rights if they do not understand the language that expresses them. This article appraises the potential comprehensibility of the notice of rights (SAPS 14A), as provided to arrested, detained and accused individuals by the SAPS. The researcher’s assessments indicate that the text is pitched at an English readability level suited to university graduates and could be too difficult for South Africans with limited schooling and linguistic abilities to comprehend. A revision of SAPS 14A is offered as an illustration of a possible improvement to increase readability and, subsequently, better access to the mentioned rights.

Sentenced by an algorithm — Bias and lack of accuracy in risk-assessment software in the United States criminal justice system

by | Jun 6, 2021 | SACJ, SACJ V34 I1 2021

Sentenced by an algorithm — Bias and lack of accuracy in risk-assessment software in the United States criminal justice system

Author Willem Gravett

ISSN: 1996-2118
Affiliations: BLC LLB (UP) LLM (Notre Dame) LLD (UP), Associate Professor in the Department of Procedural Law, University of Pretoria, Member of the New York State Bar
Source: South African Journal of Criminal Justice, Volume 34 Issue 1, p. 31 – 54
https://doi.org/10.47348/SACJ/v34/i1a2

Abstract

Developments in artificial intelligence and machine learning have caused governments to start outsourcing authority in performing public functions to machines. Indeed, algorithmic decision-making is becoming ubiquitous, from assigning credit scores to people, to identifying the best candidates for an employment position, to ranking applicants for admission to university. Apart from the broader social, ethical and legal considerations, controversies have arisen regarding the inaccuracy of AI systems and their bias against vulnerable populations. The growing use of automated risk-assessment software in criminal sentencing is a cause for both optimism and scepticism. While these tools could potentially increase sentencing accuracy and reduce the risk of human error and bias by providing evidence-based reasons in place of ‘ad-hoc’ decisions by human beings beset with cognitive and implicit biases, they also have the potential to reinforce and exacerbate existing biases, and to undermine certain of the basic constitutional guarantees embedded in the justice system. A 2016 decision in the United States, S v Loomis, exemplifies the threat that the unchecked and unrestrained outsourcing of public power to AI systems might undermine human rights and the rule of law.