1,721,228 research outputs found
‘‘Subsidiarity’’: What's in the name for constitutional interpretation and adjudication?
Full text linkCITATION: Du Plessis, L. 2006. ''Subsidiarity'' : what's in the name for constitutional interpretation and adjudication? . Stellenbosch Law Review = Stellenbosch Regstydskrif 17(2):207-231.The original publication is available at https://journals.co.za/content/journal/ju_slrINTRODUCTION: ‘‘I would lay it down as a general principle that where it is possible to decide any case, civil or criminal, without reaching a constitutional issue, that is the course which should be followed.’’ This seemingly unspectacular dictum comes from the minority judgment in the controversial Mhlungu case, one of the earliest judgments of the South African Constitutional Court. Though it is not often cited (both in the literature and the case law) the said dictum seems to articulate a ‘‘principle’’ of considerable significance. The purpose of this article is to show that this dictum and the ‘‘principle’’ to which it
refers are commensurate with and indeed a verbalisation of the notion of
subsidiarity which, subject to caveats, has a constructive role to play in
constitutional interpretation and adjudication. It will moreover be argued
that (and shown why) it is desirable to name (and thereby explicitly
recognise) the hitherto unnamed ‘‘Mhlungu principle’’ as an instance of
adjudicative subsidiarity, and to distinguish it from other forms of
subsidiarity which are also of interpretive and adjudicative significance.Met ’n dictum van Kentridge WnR in S v Mhlungu 1995 7 BCLR 793 (1995 3 SA 867) (CC) par
59 as vertrekpunt, verken die skrywer die belang van subsidiariteit in (en vir) grondwetsvertolking
en beregting. Hy identifiseer Kentridge WnR se omsigtigheidsvermaning dat enige saak, siviel of
krimineel, verkieslik beslis moet word sonder om ’n grondwetlike geskilpunt daarvan te maak
(‘‘without reaching a constitutional issue’’) as ’n verskyningsvorm van beregtende subsidiariteit
wat van ’n hof verg om ’n a-(of minstens indirek) konstitusionele bo ’n streng konstitusionele wyse
van geskilberegting te verkies wanneer die beslegting van die regsvraag vir die eersgenoemde
ruimte laat (en nie noodsaaklikerwys die laasgenoemde verg nie). Dı´t onderskei die skrywer van
jurisdiksionele subsidiariteit wat manifesteer as voorkeur vir ’n minder intens bemagtigde en
minder omvattende (‘‘laer’’) forum om ’n (grondwetlike) saak af te handel wanneer dit ook al
moontlik is. Die potensiaal van altwee vorme van subsidiariteit om tot die ontwikkeling van die
bestaande (veral gemene-)reg by te dra op ’n wyse wat grondwetlike waardes en regte bevorder,
word ondersoek.
Na oorweging van moontlike voetangels wat ’n onbehoorlike beroep op subsidiariteit in die
grondwetsvertolker en beregter se pad kan plaas, word tot die slotsom geraak dat nadenkende
steun op subsidiariteit in grondwetsvertolking en -beregting die tweerigtingverkeersvloei tussen
grondwetlike waardes, regte en norme aan die een kant, en die waardes, regte en norme van (en
ingevolge) die bestaande reg aan die ander kant aansienlik kan help vlot. Om subsidiariteit by die
naam te noem en oor die eienskappe en effekte daarvan te besin kan, volgens die outeur, ons
verstaan van die heilsame uitwerking wat (die implementering van) subsidiariteit kan heˆ ,
aansienlik verdiep (soos wat gebeur het met ‘‘proporsionaliteit’’ as maatstaf vir die beperking van
grondwetlike regte). Subsidiariteit kan daartoe bydra dat die Grondwet ’n bestaanswyse, eie aan
sigself, deur die lewende reg verwesenlik en dat die lewende reg, deur die Grondwet bemagtig en
besiel met waardes wat die gees, strekking en oogmerke van die Grondwet adem, kreatief en
vernuwend kan groei.Publishers versio
Observations on the (un-) constitutionalty of section 118(3) of the local government: systems act 32 of 2000
No full textCITATION: Du Plessis, L. 2006. Observations on the (un-) Constitutionality of section 118(3) of the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act 32 0f 2000. Stellenbosch Law Review = Stellenbosch Regstydskrif 17(3):505-531.The original publication is available at https://journals.co.za/content/journal/ju_slrINTRODUCTION: Can section 118(3) of the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act1
(‘‘the act’’) withstand constitutional scrutiny – in terms of section 25(1) of
the Constitution,2 to be more exact? The Constitutional Court – in
Mkontwana v Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality; Bissett v
Buffalo City Municipality; Transfer Rights Action Campaign v MEC for
Local Government and Housing, Gauteng3 (‘‘the Mkontwana case/
judgement’’) – left this question open, expressly and deliberately.4 In
the same breath the court found that section 118(1) of the act, the
operational stable companion of section 118(3), is not unconstitutional.
It has therefore become significant to reflect on the likely constitutional
fate of section 118(3) which, at present and at best, can but be
guesstimated.Artikel 118(1) van die Wet op Plaaslike Regering: Munisipale Stelsels 32 van 2000 stel as voorvereiste vir die registrasie van die oordrag van 'n eiendom die voorlegging aan die registrateur van aktes van 'n sertifikaat, uitgereik deur die munisipaliteit binne wie se gebied die eiendom geleë is, waarin gesertifiseer word dat alle munisipale skulde, vir die twee jaar periode voorafgaande aan die aansoek vir sodanige sertifikaat, betaal is. Volgens artikel 118(3) maak 'n bedrag verskuldig aan die munisipaliteit 'n las uit op die eiendom in verband waarmee die bedrag verskuldig is, en geniet dit voorrang bo enige verband wat teen die eiendom geregistreer is. Die Konstitusionele Hof het in Mkontwana v Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality; Bissett v Buffalo City Municipality; Transfer Rights Action Campaign v MEC for Local Government and Housing, Gauteng</i> 2005 2 BCLR 150 (2005 1 SA 530) (KH) tot die slotsom gekom dat artikel 118(1) getoets aan artikel 25(1) van die Grondwet nie 'n arbitrê re ontneming van eiendom veroorloof nie en dus grondwetlik is. Dit laat die vraag onstaan of artikel 118(3), die operasionele stalmaat van artikel 118(1), ook grondwetlike aanvegting ingevolge artikel 25(1) sou kon oorleef. In hierdie artikel word betoog dat artikel 118(3) na alle waarskynlikheid ongrondwetlik is. Die´ gevolgtrekking volg, eerstens, uit 'n aanlê van juis die kriteria wat in die Mkontwana-uitspraak aanleiding gegee het tot die bevinding dat artikel 118(1) grondwetlik is. Tweedens word die moontlikheid ondersoek dat sekere substansië le argumente oor (byvoorbeeld) beleidsoorwegings wat in die Mkontwana-uitspraak nie behoorlik uit die verf gekom het nie, in die oorweging van die grondwetlikheid van artikel 118(3) weer geopper sou kon word - en na alle waarskynlikheid die gevolgtrekking sal versterk dat artikel 118(3) ongrondwetlik is.Publishers versio
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
An analysis of the human rights and gender consequences of the new South African constitution and bill of rights with regard to the recognition and implementation of Muslim personal law (MPL)
No full textDoctor Legum - LLDPrior to the new constitutional dispensation in South Africa all women had identities of
race and gender imposed on them. With a new dispensation in place Muslim women,
however, still have to deal with identities attributed to them by religion and culture.
The author of this dissertation is herself a Muslim woman who has struggled to
reconcile her public life and "new found" equality with these identities. She found it
difficult to believe that Islam, the self same religion which had brought seventh-century
Arabian society out of its degenerating stupor, could be used to justify behaviour by
conservative religious authorities ( Ulama) in South Africa which deny women equality. 1
Earlier research2 partly allayed her suspicions and fears but did not lay them to rest
completely. The fact that South Africa was to face a human rights revolution which
would ultimately affect the lives of all her citizens for the better, sparked off a desire
within the author to establish whether it is not possible to reconcile the undeniable and
unalterable spirit of equality within Islam with the implementation of a reformed
Muslim Personal Law (MPL)3 so that women can enjoy the best of both worlds.
I
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
Book Review: Who are We?
No full textBOOK REVIEW (by Larise du Plessis, with reply by Author)
Ron Dultz (2007). Who Are We? Reseda, CA: Ron Dultz Publishing
Soft Cover (174 pages)
ISBN 10: 0-615-16088-7 & ISBN 13: 978-0-615-16088-7
Cost: USA $12.0
- …
