Abstract
first contribution is a keynote speech delivered by Judge Dennis Davis, a Judge of the High Court, Cape Town and Judge President of the Competition Appeal Court. His speech was delivered on 16 November 2012, at the 3rd Human Rights Indaba on The Role of International Law in Understanding and Applying the Socio-economic Rights in South Africa's Bill of Rights, co-hosted by the Konrad-Adenauer Foundation and the Faculty of Law of North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus. Judge Davis investigates the relationship between courts and the other arms of government in promoting and protecting socio-economic rights in South Africa and airs his views on the doctrine of the separation of powers.
Highlights
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COURTS AND THE OTHER ARMS OF GOVERNMENT IN PROMOTING AND PROTECTING SOCIO-ECONOMIC RIGHTS
The idea is that various institutions of State should work to promote and to vindicate basis democratic principles which are directed to accountable control of decision making and substantive political equality between citizens
This particular submission is luminously highlighted in the instructive article of Williams referred to earlier, in which she compares the approach of the German and South African Constitutional Courts, the latter in Mazibuko and the former in a case known as Hartz IV
Summary
The model of constitutional democracy which is envisaged in the 1996 text of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (the Constitution) has been described as promoting 'a thick' conception of democracy. In turn the task should be directed to improve the principle of democratic accountability of public institutions and their commitment to constitutional rights This particular submission is luminously highlighted in the instructive article of Williams referred to earlier, in which she compares the approach of the German and South African Constitutional Courts, the latter in Mazibuko and the former in a case known as Hartz IV. The concept of reasonableness, which initially in South Africa was coupled with a substantive requirement of the primacy of treatment for the poorest of the poor, is sufficiently flexible and the doctrine of separation of powers manifestly so ambiguous and indeterminate, that courts, even if fully committed to the doctrine of separation of powers, can adopt entirely different approaches to cases involving social and economic rights. 23 I am indebted for these insights to the article by Professor Williams as cited above. 11 / 638
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal/Potchefstroomse Elektroniese Regsblad
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
