ISSN: 1996-2118
Affiliations: None
Source: South African Journal of Criminal Justice, Volume 29 Issue 2, p. 207 – 223
None
ISSN: 1996-2118
Affiliations: None
Source: South African Journal of Criminal Justice, Volume 29 Issue 2, p. 197 – 206
None
ISSN: 1996-2118
Affiliations: None
Source: South African Journal of Criminal Justice, Volume 29 Issue 2, p. 182 – 196
None
ISSN: 1996-2118
Affiliations: None
Source: South African Journal of Criminal Justice, Volume 29 Issue 2, p. 173 – 182
None
ISSN: 1996-2118
Affiliations: Senior Lecturer, Department of Criminal and Procedural Law, UNISA
Source: South African Journal of Criminal Justice, Volume 29 Issue 2, p. 158 – 172
Hate-crime laws include laws that specifically criminalise unlawful conduct motivated by bias or prejudice towards personal characteristics of the victim and laws that allow for the imposition of harsher penalties on convicted hate-crime offenders. Such laws are often justified on the retributive basis that hate crimes cause greater harms than crimes that are not motivated by bias or prejudice. The imposition of a harsher punishment on the convicted hate-crime offender is therefore justifiable since it is proportional to the harms caused and because it is the offender’s just desert. However this retributive justification for hate-crime laws has been the subject of academic criticism. This article therefore attempts to find an alternative rationale for hate-crime laws by exploring denunciation as another justification for retribution and by considering the utilitarian theory of punishment. The South African context is considered since hate-crime laws do not presently exist in South African law. This article posits that the enactment of a hatecrime law in South Africa could be regarded as a symbolic commitment to equality since hate crimes are said to violate the right to equality.
ISSN: 1996-2118
Affiliations: Professor in the Department of Criminal and Procedural Law, University of South Africa
Source: South African Journal of Criminal Justice, Volume 29 Issue 2, p. 140 – 157
Parental alienation conduct forms the focus of this article. It is distinguished from the parental alienation syndrome which identifies specific behavioural symptoms in children exposed to parental alienation. The harms caused by parental alienation conduct are investigated. The manner in which family courts deal with parental alienation is examined as well by the best interests of a child standard. Parental alienation conduct is identified as a form of emotional and psychological abuse and as a form of domestic violence. The lacunae evident in the approaches adopted by the family courts are examined and highlighted. Legislation regulating and proscribing parental alienation abroad are considered. The field of criminal law is examined in order to establish solutions to the gaps that are evident in the family law. A cross-dimensional approach between family law and criminal law is also suggested.