"The question of an appropriate sentence is one of the important aspects of criminal law. Critically discuss the various forms of punishment and how courts determine a sentence. Given the broader South African context, argue in favour of a restorative approach to sentencing, as opposed to a retributive approach."
The approach to criminal law in South Africa has substantially changed with regards to the apartheid, and post-apartheid eras. This essay looks at the forms, enforcement and processes of sentencing and punishment in South Africa. The key assumption, with regards to this, is that restorative sentencing is the needed approach in order to reach the goals that South Africa has set in terms of its Constitution, and the ideas put forward by influential South Africans such as Nelson Mandela, Arch Bishop Desmond Tutu and Chief Justice Langa. Retributive punishment has proven to be old fashioned, and doesn't lie in line with not only South Africa's Constitution, but also with the increasing emphasis on Human Rights in the global sphere.
When considering a case, the court has to take into account three main points. The seriousness of the offence, the interests of the community, and the personal circumstances of the offender. This makes the sentence a very individual regarding the specific offender, victims and …show more content…
This case was the first case heard in the Constitutional Court in South Africa, post-apartheid. This case was the turning point from the retributive approach to justice, to a restorative one, as it rendered Section 277(1)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act invalid with the constitution. It served as a step towards a society that held human dignity and value to the highest degree, a pivotal move from the apartheid era. Retribution doesn't hold the same weight as the right to life and
The approach to criminal law in South Africa has substantially changed with regards to the apartheid, and post-apartheid eras. This essay looks at the forms, enforcement and processes of sentencing and punishment in South Africa. The key assumption, with regards to this, is that restorative sentencing is the needed approach in order to reach the goals that South Africa has set in terms of its Constitution, and the ideas put forward by influential South Africans such as Nelson Mandela, Arch Bishop Desmond Tutu and Chief Justice Langa. Retributive punishment has proven to be old fashioned, and doesn't lie in line with not only South Africa's Constitution, but also with the increasing emphasis on Human Rights in the global sphere.
When considering a case, the court has to take into account three main points. The seriousness of the offence, the interests of the community, and the personal circumstances of the offender. This makes the sentence a very individual regarding the specific offender, victims and …show more content…
This case was the first case heard in the Constitutional Court in South Africa, post-apartheid. This case was the turning point from the retributive approach to justice, to a restorative one, as it rendered Section 277(1)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act invalid with the constitution. It served as a step towards a society that held human dignity and value to the highest degree, a pivotal move from the apartheid era. Retribution doesn't hold the same weight as the right to life and