Grounds For Justification Research Articles

PUTATIVE PRIVATE DEFENCE IN CRIMINAL LAW Tuta v The State 2023 (2) BCLR 179 (CC)

In a country like South Africa, plagued as it is by violent contact crime, it is not surprising that the defences of private defence and putative private defence are often raised by accused in criminal trials. It is trite that, for a conviction in a criminal court, the prosecution is tasked with proving the accused’s liability beyond reasonable doubt. As an element of a crime, unlawfulness does not simply lie in fulfilment of the definitional elements of a crime. There are instances where, notwithstanding fulfilment of the definitional elements of a crime, the conduct is justified or legally regarded as objectively reasonable. These instances are known as grounds of justification and technically serve to exclude unlawfulness. A ground of justification, if successfully raised, is therefore a complete defence to any criminal charge. There is not a numerus clausus of valid grounds of justification in South African criminal law; the test remains whether the accused’s conduct was objectively reasonable in the particular situation. One such ground of justification is private defence. A person acts in private defence, and therefore lawfully, if they use the minimum force necessary to ward off an unlawful human attack that has commenced, or is imminently threatening, upon their or somebody else’s protected legal interests such as life, physical integrity, property, reputation or dignity. The defensive act in private defence must be: necessary to protect the threatened interest; directed at the attacker; reasonably proportionate to the attack; and perpetrated with the knowledge that it is performed in private defence. Unlike private defence, putative private defence is not a ground of justification that excludes unlawfulness. Putative private defence exists where an accused is under the mistaken belief that they are conducting themselves in private defence whereas there is no such ground of justification in the circumstances. If an accused labours under the genuine but erroneous belief in the existence of a ground of justification, their conduct remains unlawful. The accused lacks the knowledge that they are, in reality, acting unlawfully. While the accused’s conduct remains unlawful, the absence of knowledge of unlawfulness results in a lack of intention, since knowledge of unlawfulness is an integral part of intention. The accused’s mistaken belief that they are acting lawfully in private defence must be honest and genuine but need not be rational or reasonable. If, on the facts, there could be no honest and genuine belief on the accused’s part in the lawfulness of their defensive act, putative private defence cannot exist. 
 It is trite that, for private defence to succeed as a ground of justification, the test is objective in the sense that the attack and the defensive action must meet certain objective requirements. The accused’s subjective belief, whatever it may be, has no impact on the validity of private defence as a ground of justification. The Constitutional Court in Tuta v The State (2023 (2) BCLR 179 (CC)) was recently tasked with making a finding on the correct legal test to be applied to the existence of the defence of putative private defence. In this contribution, the Constitutional Court’s decision is analysed.

The application of the doctrine of informed consent in South African medical law: Reflections on significant developments in the case law

The doctrine of informed consent is the foundation of the physician–patient relationship. This doctrine remains controversial despite its importance, and issues involving consent are frequently litigated. This article examines the application of the doctrine of informed consent in South African medical law as it has developed in South African case law. This examination first sets a normative background for consent as a ground of justification against a wrong ful act in either contract or delict (or both) that is significantly influenced by the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. Against this normative background, a selected anthology of nine significant judgments by South African courts is analysed, with specific attention paid to the critical shift prompted by the promulgation of the Constitution. Finally, the analyses of the nine judgments are consolidated and collated to draw conclusions about the triumphs and failings of the South African courts, based on the normative background. This analysis reveals which aspects of the doctrine of informed consent have crystallised in South African medical law and which remain unclear.

Legal grounds for justification of the legal status of the convicted as bearers of constitutional rights and freedoms

The article analyzes the legal grounds for substantiating the legal status of convicts as holders of constitutional rights and freedoms, as well as the need for a comprehensive analysis of this issue from the point of view of the science of constitutional law of Ukraine. After all, such an approach acts as an important and necessary doctrinal basis for comprehensive improvement of penitentiary legislation and the practice of its implementation. However, on the basis of the analysis of the achievements of modern legal doctrine, the fact is stated that such studies are clearly lacking. Instead, the main attention is paid to the study of the rights and freedoms of persons serving a sentence within the framework of other legal sciences. The thesis is proved that a look at the mentioned problem from the point of view of the science of constitutional law of Ukraine will allow to reveal those fundamental and most important aspects that cannot objectively be revealed within the scope of the study of other legal sciences. So, in particular, it will make it possible to look at the existing rights, freedoms and duties of convicts critically and from the perspective of high constitutional standards in this area, as well as to form a scientific basis for the fundamental reform of the legal status of convicts and the internal organizational mechanisms for ensuring it. On the basis of the analysis of the constitutional text, a conclusion is made about the substantial attention of the constitution maker to the legal position of convicts in Ukraine. Such an approach gives this status not only stability and certainty in today's conditions, but also a clear direction for the future. In this regard, it is noted that the formation of the constitutional-legal status of convicts is carried out not only thanks to the specific constitutional norms concerning these issues, but also thanks to the legal properties of the Constitution of Ukraine as a normative-legal act and the nature of the punishment, based on the appointment of which a person acquires the status of a convicted person. Taking into account the above, a general conclusion is made that today there is every reason to talk about the constitutional and legal status of convicts in Ukraine, which is due to the fact that such persons are full bearers of constitutional rights and freedoms. In this regard, it is relevant to look at the mentioned problem from the point of view of the science of constitutional law of Ukraine.

On citizens' right to information: Justification and analysis of the democratic right to be well informed

On citizens' right to information: Justification and analysis of the democratic right to be well informed

KIDNAPPING BY DECEIT R v Cort [2003] 3 WLR 1300; [2004] 4 All ER 137 (CA)

The nature of consent, and its ambit and operation as a criminal law defence, remains somewhat unclear (see De Wet De Wet en Swanepoel Strafreg 4ed (1985) 94). This is not surprising, given the fact that the assessment of whether consent is present is largely determined on the basis of public policy. Unlike other justification grounds which indicate that, all things considered, the conduct in question was the right thing to do (eg defence), consent “embodies a recognition that the autonomy of the other person (‘victim’) is involved, and that if that person agrees to the conduct there should be no offence” (Ashworth Principles of Criminal Law 3ed (1999)331). Recognizing a defence of consent involves taking the individual will into account, in allowing individuals “to assume those consequences that they took into account when they adopted the decision; that is, in permitting them to incorporate these consequences into the course of their lives” (Nino The Ethics of Human Rights (1991) 180). It is clear that the law allows a person complete right of disposal over her property, but does not recognize her consent to the taking of her life by another. More difficult questions arise in relation to whether there can be consent to a violation of bodily integrity, particularly in the area of sport andmedical treatment (see Burchell Principles of Criminal Law 3ed (2005) 333-338). A particularly significant question, which is central to the discussion which follows, is when the apparent consent of the complainant can be excluded. Though it is settled law that consent induced by force or threats is not recognized for the purposes of the criminal law (Burchell 341), the position is not as clear with regard to whether consent induced by fraud will be excluded as a defence (Van Oosten and Labuschagne “Bedrieglike Voorstellings en Toestemming in die Strafreg” 1977 De Jure 80 81). This issue will be discussed below, in the light of the case of R v Cort.

Vonnisbespreking: Waagartieste leer haar heiland ken. Gevestigde regsbeginsels egter tot haar redding Jackson v Road Accident Fund 2021 4 SA 244 (GP)

In Jackson the court had to decide whether the plaintiff, a stuntwoman by profession, had given consent to the risk of injury before she was seriously injured during the filming of an exciting scene in which she had to ride a motorcycle at high speed towards a vehicle carrying a camera approaching from the opposite direction. Due to the negligence of the driver of that vehicle the camera which had been dangling from a boom arm had been lifted too late to avoid a collision with the plaintiff. The gist of the defendant’s plea was that the plaintiff had known that she was engaged in a hazardous exercise, which implied that she had accepted the risk of harm that ultimately befell her. The court first dealt with the issue of negligence, which, according to some academic writers, should have been postponed until a decision on possible wrongfulness of the driver had been made. In view of recent decisions of the Supreme Court of Appeal it is shown that the court’s approach in finalising the issue of the driver’s negligence and the lack of contributory negligence on the plaintiff’s part was justified. The court approached the issue of consent to the risk of injury (voluntary assumption of risk) by reiterating the three basic requirements for establishing whether the plaintiff had consented to the risk of injury, namely full knowledge of the extent of the risk, appreciation of the ambit of the risk and subjective consent (authoritatively established in 1904 in Waring & Gillow Ltd v Sherborne). It then applied four previous judgments (and in addition referred to one more) to the facts (Durban City Council v SA Board Mills Ltd, Kepko v Road Accident Fund, Lampert v Hefer and Santam Insurance Co Ltd v Vorster; reference to Oosthuizen v London and Lancashire Insurance Co Ltd) and effectively reached the conclusion that the issue of consent in such circumstances is fact-sensitive in that a court has to guard against drawing conclusions from circumstances such as are present in the case under discussion, for example that the plaintiff had been occupied in exercising an intrinsically dangerous profession. Each of these judgments is briefly discussed to demonstrate how they were applied by the court to found its final conclusion. This judgment again demonstrates that courts are bound to determine the exact state of mind of the plaintiff to be able to ascertain whether he or she had in fact realised and appreciated the risk which he or she has accepted and had subjectively consented to it. The onus of proof on a defendant employing this defence is daunting and the value of good cross-examination of a plaintiff in cases of this nature is emphasised. This judgment provides a good example that can be utilised by lecturers for explaining the operation of the ground of justification of volenti non fit iniuria (literally: “To a willing person, it is not a wrong”) in the guise of voluntary assumption of risk to students. Finally, there is a reference to the relevance of English case law for resolving issues pertaining to consent cases of the risk kind in South Africa. It is noteworthy that a leading English authority, the 1891 Appeal Court case of Smith v Charles Baker & Sons which was quoted as good authority as far back as 1904 in Waring & Gillow Ltd v Sherborne is still regarded as applicable in modern English tort law in respect of actions instituted by employees who suffered harm in the scope of their employment while undertaking risky operations.

Language in the context of South African workplace discrimination law

This contribution considers the role of language as a prohibited ground of unfair discrimination in the workplace in South Africa, an area of law that has been somewhat neglected in the literature to date. It starts by setting out the constitutional and legislative framework for the protection of language rights and the prohibition of unfair discrimination based on language as a listed ground. It then, with brief comparative reference to other prominent jurisdictions, explains the potential ways in which an employer may unfairly discriminate against employees based on language, following which it considers the potential grounds for justification of language-based discrimination in the workplace. After consideration of the sparse case law on the topic in South Africa, it highlights a few specific issues regarding language and workplace discrimination, before concluding with some thoughts on potential future developments.

Language in the Context of South African Workplace Discrimination Law

This contribution considers the role of language as a prohibited ground of unfair discrimination in the workplace in South Africa, an area of law that has been somewhat neglected in the literature to date. It starts by setting out the constitutional and legislative framework for the protection of language rights and the prohibition of unfair discrimination based on language as a listed ground. It then, with brief comparative reference to other prominent jurisdictions, explains the potential ways in which an employer may unfairly discriminate against employees based on language, following which it considers the potential grounds for justification of language-based discrimination in the workplace. After consideration of the sparse case law on the topic in South Africa, it highlights a few specific issues regarding language and workplace discrimination, before concluding with some thoughts on potential future developments.

The Right to International Solidarity as a Game Changer when it comes to “Crimes of Solidarity”?

The article discusses whether there is a Right to International Solidarity that hinders the prosecution of “Crimes of Solidarity” in the context of (illegal) migration. The focus lies therefore on European and International Human Rights Law, the Facilitation Directive of the EU, UNCLOS and the Draft Declaration on the Right to International Solidarity. The notion “Crimes of Solidarity” refers to cases where private actors face judicial consequences for “doing good” (sea rescue, providing shelter, food and medical aid to migrants). As there is neither a right to enter a certain harbour nor a duty to let people disembark, a possible ground for justification might be the Right to International Solidarity, providing a right to help and to be helped. This could have the effect of excluding prosecution for these crimes of solidarity. The article analyses to what extent a Right to International Solidarity exists and thus might hinder the criminalisation of acts of solidarity. Under the current international and regional law there is no Right to International Solidarity, neither through treaty nor customary law. Nevertheless, the potential to become a game changer can be seen in its possible effects on the interpretation of other established (human) rights and international standards. Even though the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and Solidarity’s “Draft Declaration on the Right to International Solidarity” cannot be qualified as soft law as long as it is not adopted by the General Assembly, it can nevertheless serve as a starting point for necessary discussions in the decriminalisation of solidarity.

Is the assessment under Article 8 ECHR for migrants justifiable?

The paper analyses the protection granted under Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights for different immigration cases. The way the European Court of Human Rights determines compliance with Article 8 for settled migrants differs from the way the Court determines compliance for foreign nationals seeking entry or requesting to regularize their irregular migration status. The paper argues that the European Court of Human Rights application of different principles when determining a States’ positive and negative obligations is contradicting its own case law. It also argues that the absence of justification grounds for the refusal of foreign nationals who are seeking entry lacks legitimacy. By treating all immigration cases under Article 8(2) the paper suggests that the differentiation between cases should be based on how a refusal of entry or an expulsion would impact on the family life. The paper also suggests that more consideration should be given towards the insiders interests when balancing the individual rights against the state's interests. These changes would lead to a more consistent and fair case law and generate a more convergent practice by the states which will increase the precedent value of the Court's judgements.

WARRANTLESS SEARCHES AND AWARDS FOR DAMAGES IN LIGHT OF THE JUDGMENT IN Shashape v The Minister of Police Case No.: 1566/2018

The law of criminal procedure is “double functional” in that it not only dictates the proper procedure for the execution of police functions but also serves as a ground of justification in substantive law against otherwise unlawful conduct. Nevertheless, personal liberties, even in the pursuit of justice in a country overrun by crime, cannot be sacrificed indiscriminately simply to further the diligent investigation of crime.An example of personal liberties being sacrificed in favour of the pursuit of justice is the search and seizure of private spaces of individuals. Search and seizure may be effected both with and without a warrant and is regulated by the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 (CPA). However, where a police official acts outside of this legislative matrix, his or her conduct is not regarded as lawful; he or she may not rely on official capacity as a ground of justification against an (unlawful) search. In such instances, the Minister of Police may be vicariously liable in delict owing to the unlawful conduct of police officials. Such cases are relatively rare.This contribution will focus on two specific aspects – namely, search and seizure conducted without a warrant, and subsequent awards for damages based on unlawful, warrantless searches. The recent judgment in Shashape v The Minister of Police (WHC (unreported) 2020-04-30 Case no 1566/2018 (Shashape)) is discussed against this backdrop.

VOLUNTARY ASSUMPTION OF RISK AS A DEFENCE, EXCLUDING DELICTUAL LIABILITY WITH REGARD TO SPORTS INJURIES Hattingh v Roux 2011 (5) SA 135 (WCC)

In the case of sports injuries which occur in the ordinary course of the practice of sport, delictual liability may be excluded as a result of voluntary assumption of risk, also known as consent to the risk of injury (a ground of justification) which is embodied in the well-known maxim volenti non fit iniuria (Hattingh v Roux 2011 5 SA 135 (WCC) 141 hereinafter “Hattingh”; Prinsloo “Liability inSport and Recreation” 1991 TSAR 42–43; and Stoffberg v Elliott 1923 (CPD) 148–149). There is no doubt of the risk of injury inherent in sport, and all participants such as players, coaches, referees, supervisors, managers or spectators are at risk. In order to exclude delictual liability based on a successful reliance of voluntary assumption of risk as a ground of justification, all the requirements for consent must be present. In Hattingh, the court had to decide inter alia whether the plaintiff (R) voluntarily assumed the risk of injuryinherent in participating in a game of rugby. In this note, Hattingh is discussed with specific reference to the delictual elements of wrongfulness and fault, and the defence of voluntary assumption of risk. Reference is also made to other cases dealing with the defence.

Threshold of justification of emergency regulations: On coherentism requirement for the justification of measures adopted in the Czech Republic during the COVID-19 pandemic

The article deals with justification of generally binding legal acts as part of a state governed by the rule of law. The “state of exception” caused by the COVID-19 pandemic adds a new dimension to the issue of justification. The practice prevailing in the Czech Republic in 2020 did not reflect even the minimum requirements for justifying emergency measures, which brought on problems both in the practical application of the adopted measures and in their subsequent judicial review. The article attempts to find an appropriate level of justification, referred to as the threshold of justification and based on the coherentist theory of epistemic justification. The basis of such justification lies in the idea that individual grounds for justification can be found in the explanatory reports of the legislation, on the one hand, and in various pieces of relevant information available to the addressees, on the other hand. All these reasons should form a coherent whole and they should ultimately legitimize restrictions on the freedom of individuals. The final part of the article describes the importance of the threshold of justification for the review of proportionality and even reasonableness of the law.

Beginning Point of the Ten-Year Extension Period in Fixed Term Lease Contracts for Residential and Roofed Business Premises and the Earliest Time Period for the Lessor to Notify Termination

The termination of lease contracts of residential and roofed business premises has been regulated under the 347th article of Turkish Code of Obligations numbered 6098. First paragraph of the article regulates the termination of lease contracts for residences (dwelling houses) and roofed business premises (working places) concluded for a limited duration (fixed term contracts). Pursuant to the first paragraph of Article 347, at the fixed term lease contract of residential and roofed business premises, the contract is deemed to be extended for one year under the same conditions unless the tenant gives notice at least fifteen days prior to the expiration of the contract. The lessor cannot terminate the contract based on the expiry of the contract period. However, at the end of the ten-year extension period, the lessor may terminate the contract without any justification grounds, by giving at least three months’ notice before the end of each extension period. It is controversial when the ten-year extension period will begin and when the lessor can use the right to terminate at the earliest. In addition, in cases where the lease term is agreed for a period of more than ten years, when the lessor can use the right of termination, is a matter to be evaluated separately. In this study, in terms of the termination of fixed term lease contracts for residential and roofed business premises, the issue of the beginning of the ten-year extension period and the earliest time that the lessor can notify the end of the contract for termination is evaluated in the context of opinions and judicial practice. Finally, our opinion regarding the subject as de lege lata and de lege ferenda is explained.

Numerical Investigation of Strength Mismatch Effect on Ductile Crack Growth Resistance in Welding Pipe

The effect of strength mismatch (ratio between the yield stress of weld metal and base metal, My) on the ductile crack growth resistance of welding pipe was numerically analyzed. The ductile fracture behavior of welding pipe was determined while using the single edge notched bending (SENB) and single edge notched tension (SENT) specimens, as well as axisymmetric models of circumferentially cracked pipes for comparison. Crack growth resistance curves (as denoted by crack tip opening displacement-resistance (CTOD-R curve) have been computed using the complete Gurson model. A so-called CTOD-Q-M formulation was proposed to calculate the weld mismatch constraint M. It has been shown that the fracture resistance curves significantly increase with the increase of the mismatch ratio. As for SENT and pipe, the larger My causes the lower mismatch constraint M, which leads to the higher fracture toughness and crack growth resistance curves. When compared with the standard SENB, the SENT specimen and the cracked pipe have a more similar fracture resistance behavior. The results present grounds for justification of usage of SENT specimens in fracture assessment of welding cracked pipes as an alternative to the traditional conservative SENB specimens.

Drilling for the future: Gendered justifications of the Arctic fossil fuel industry

AbstractDespite the global alarm caused by accelerating climate change, hydrocarbon companies are exploring and opening up new oil and gas fields all over the world, including the Arctic. With increasing attention on the Arctic, companies address the growing global environmental pressure in their public marketing in various ways. This article examines the webpages of Norwegian Equinor and Russian Gazprom & Gazprom Neft. Building on feminist discussions, I analyse the different justification strategies these fossil fuel companies working in the Arctic utilise in order to support their ongoing operations. This article concludes that in order to justify their operations in the Arctic, the Norwegian and Russian companies emphasise values based on discourses that have historically and culturally been associated with masculine practices, such as the control of nature enabled by technology. These justifications are thus reinforcing the narrative of the Arctic as a territory to be conquered and mastered. Even though the companies operate in different sociopolitical contexts, the grounds of justification are rather similar. Their biggest differences occur in their visual presentations of gender, which I argue is part of the justification. Approaching the fossil fuel industry from a feminist perspective allows questioning the dominant conceptualisations, which the justifications of Arctic hydrocarbon companies are based on.

Hukuk Düzeninin Birliği Ilkesi Çerçevesinde Zorunluluk Hâlinin Hukukî Niteliği

The current Turkish legal doctrine on the state of necessity mostly handles the concept separately in terms of civil and criminal law. However, the principle of unity of the legal order requires a holistic approach. Especially after the entry into force of the Turkish Penal Code (TPC) and the Code of Penal Procedure (CPP) on 01.06.2005, the legal nature of the state of necessity has been extensively discussed in criminal law doctrine. But these discussions rarely, if ever, take the fact that the state of necessity constitutes a ground of justification under civil law into account. This study takes a holistic approach in examining the legal nature of the state of necessity and emphasizes the interaction between civil law and criminal law within the context of grounds for justification. It starts with general remarks on the principle of unity of the legal order and proceeds with a description of the state of necessity with a particular focus on its legal nature from civil law and criminal law perspectives respectively. The study concludes that in light of the clear provision in Art. 223 (3) (c) CPP, the state of necessity does not constitute a justification in criminal law, and therefore, where Art. 25 (2) TPC applies, the judgment to be rendered is not an acquittal, but a decision that infliction of punishment is not required. Nonetheless in cases where the act qualifies as one performed in a state of necessity from a civil law perspective, the act shall also be deemed lawful in terms of criminal law and the court shall decide for acquittal.

A Critical Assessment of the Zimbabwe-South Africa Import Licensing Dispute

The gravamen of the dispute between Zimbabwe and South Africa is the introduction by Zimbabwe of an import-licensing regime for various goods through Statutory Instrument 64 of 2016 (‘the Instrument’). Zimbabwe alleges that the Instrument is primarily aimed at protecting local industries and alleviating balance of payment challenges. Consequently, this article assesses the legality of the Zimbabwe import-licensing regime implemented primarily against goods from South Africa by examining the grounds of justification proffered by Zimbabwe. The article contends, first, that the Instrument is a quantitative restriction that violates Articles XI.1 and XIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). Secondly, the article argues that the Instrument falls foul of the WTO Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures in that the administration of the measure is unduly burdensome and goes beyond the extent necessary. Thirdly, the article contends that the Instrument fails to fulfil the requirements for a valid ‘safeguard measure’ in the manner contemplated by Article XIX of GATT and the Agreement on Safeguards. In the alternative, the article argues that the urgency of the situation in Zimbabwe is such that any delay would cause irreparable damage and therefore entitles Zimbabwe to exercise the right to implement safeguard measures. Lastly, the article contends that the Instrument is substantially in line with the ‘balance of payments’ exception as postulated by the Understanding on the Balance of Payments Provisions of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 and GATT.

Chastisement Between Islamic Sharia and the Jordanian Penal Code

This study addresses chastisement between Islamic Sharia and the Jordanian Penal Code. The Islamic Sharia recognizes the right of chastising children and the wife within legitimacy controls and restrictions. Under Penal Article 62, the Jordanian legislator provides for chastisement where it is considered as one of justification grounds that implies excluding the act from offence and becomes in the context of legitimacy. Our legislation is based on Islamic Sharia, which is a source of the Jordanian Legal System. In order to fulfil the desired goals of the study, it is necessary to start by identifying the Islamic Sharia position on chastising children and identifying the gradual means for chastising children as well as identifying controls and restrictions. Then we explain the right of chastising children in the Penal Code and its legal conditions to justify chastisement as we identify the position of Jordanian Judiciary on this issue. The study has tackled the chastisement of the wife in Islam and the Penal Code and its restrictions. We have concluded in this study that chastisement in Islamic Sharia and Jordanian Penal Code is restricted by the one who has the right to chastise persons subjected to it, chastisement meaning, and its purposes. Keywords: Chastisement, Justification Ground, Trustee, Desertion. DOI : 10.7176/JLPG/89-20 Publication date :September 30 th 2019

Literackie obrachunki z dzieciństwem na zesłaniu w Związku Sowieckim. Wstępne rozpoznanie

The article discusses autobiographical prose of the writers of the war generation, devoted to the problems of deportation into the interior of the Soviet Union during World War II. The considerations include the works published in Poland after 1989: Andrzej Turczynski’s Chlopiec na czerwonym koniu (1991), Piotr Bednarski’s Blekitne śniegi (1996), Andrzej Czcibor-Piotrowski’s Rzeczy nienasycone (1999), Zbigniew Domino’s Syberiada polska (2001) and Tajga. Tamtego lata w Kajenie (2007). The carried out analysis of the literary texts provides the grounds for justification of the thesis that the writers broke with the earlier existing conventions of war writing, referring to the close to the child’s imagination poetics of fairy-tale, parable, dream, mythologisation of reality, and that while showing exiled childhood in the Soviet Union they used very specific topoi (the image of parents, mainly of the mother, the motif of friendship and peer groups, as well as of adventure and initiation).