S v Williams : a springboard for further debate about corporal punishment

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Skelton, Ann, 1961-
dc.date.accessioned 2015-10-01T08:49:41Z
dc.date.available 2015-10-01T08:49:41Z
dc.date.issued 2015
dc.description.abstract In an early judgment of the Constitutional Court, S v Williams, Justice Langa found that judicial whippings were unconstitutional because they violated young offenders’ rights to dignity and humane treatment. Former Chief Justice Langa was also a member of the unanimous court that found the law prohibiting corporal punishment in schools to be a reasonable and justifiable infringement of their parents’ right to religious freedom. However, s 12 of the South African Constitution guarantees everyone the right to be protected from all forms of violence, either from public or private sources. This contribution considers how the court might deal with a challenge to the constitutionality of the common-law defence of reasonable chastisement, which permits corporal punishment of children by their parents in their own homes. en_ZA
dc.description.librarian am2015 en_ZA
dc.description.uri http://www.journals.co.za/ej/ejour_ju_jur.html en_ZA
dc.identifier.citation Skelton, A 2015, 'S v Williams : a springboard for further debate about corporal punishment', Acta Juridica, pp. 336-359. en_ZA
dc.identifier.issn 0065-1346 (print)
dc.identifier.issn 1996-2088 (online)
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/2263/50133
dc.language.iso en en_ZA
dc.publisher Juta Law en_ZA
dc.rights Juta Law en_ZA
dc.subject Reasonable chastisement en_ZA
dc.subject Corporal punishment of children en_ZA
dc.subject Parents en_ZA
dc.subject Constitutional Court en_ZA
dc.title S v Williams : a springboard for further debate about corporal punishment en_ZA
dc.type Article en_ZA


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record