About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

2 S. Afr. J. Crim. Just. 137 (1989)
How Did We Get Our Lopsided Law on the Imposition of the Death Penalty for Common-Law Crimes - And What Should We Do about It

handle is hein.journals/soafcrimj2 and id is 145 raw text is: SACJ (1989) 2 SAS How did we get our lopsided law on the imposition of the death penalty for common-law crimes? And what should we do about it? ELLISON KAHN* General Smuts has been said to be the person responsible. It was he who suggested in 1935 that we retain the compulsory death sentence for murder (except for a woman convicted of the murder of her newly born child or where the culprit was under 16 - raised to 18 in 1958), but that the court should have a discretion where there are extenuating circumstances.' It was he who made the then wise decision to provide for this further exception and carried it through Parliament. So it has been suggested.2 This is an oversimplification of what was an involved legislative pro- cess.' Now that there is a strong movement to give the presiding judge the same discretion to impose the death sentence with murder as he has with our other capital crimes - a subject to which I shall return - it is only fair to the memory of Smuts that the full tale be told. It may also give support to the movement. In the Roman-Dutch law the general punishment for murder was death, but whether it should be imposed depended on the circumstances, such as provocation and the age and status of the culprit or the status of the person murdered: what might be labelled, in an extended sense, as mitigating or aggravating circumstances.4 For rape, capital punishment * SC BCom LLB (Witwatersrand) LLM LLD (Natal) Hon LLD (Cape Town), of the Middle Temple, Barrister, Profissor of Law, Uniwrit of the Witwat-rsrand, Johannesbrg. 'In chronological order: the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act 31 of 1917 s 338, as amended by s 61 of the General Law Amendment Act 46 of 1935; the Criminal Procedure Act 56 of 1955 s 329; the Criminal Law Amendment Act 16 of 1959 s 25; the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 s 277. 2jpj Coetzer SC, of the Pretoria Bar, formerly Secretary for Justice and thereafter Director- General: Justice 'Beskouings oor die Doodstraf' (1988) 1 Consultus 15 at 16-7. This is only a mild criticism of Mr Coetzer's otherwise admirable article. See, for example, Antonius Matthaeus II De Criminibus, ad libros XL VII et XL VIII Digestorum Commentarius (1644) 48.5.3.4 and 48.18.9; Van Leeuwen Het Roomsbc Hollandsch Recht (1664) 4.34.1ff; Van der Keessel Praekctiones adjus Criminale (c 1772-82) edited and translated by B Beinart & P van Warmelo (1969-81) 48.8.8; Van der Linden Koopmans Handboek 2.1.6 and 2.5.8. See too JC de Wet & HL Swanepoel Strafreg 4 ed (1985) 211 (n14).

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most