Email this article 
Post a Comment 
Hide
Show all
Original Research
Godsdiensregte in die regspraak: uitlegmetodes in die CESA-beslissings
Koers - Bulletin for Christian Scholarship/Bulletin vir Christelike Wetenskap | Vol 69, No 4 | a318 |
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4102/koers.v69i4.318
| © 2004 J. Swanepoel
| This work is licensed under CC Attribution 4.0
Submitted: 31 July 2004 | Published: 31 July 2004
Submitted: 31 July 2004 | Published: 31 July 2004
About the author(s)
J. Swanepoel, Fakulteit Regte, Potchefstroomkampus, Noordwes-Universiteit, South AfricaFull Text:
PDF (162KB)Abstract
Religious rights in case law: Methods of interpretation in the CESA judgments
In this article an investigation is conducted into the methods of interpretation followed by specific courts in the adjudication of disputes concerning rights pertaining to religion. This inquiry takes place against the backdrop of an exposition of the protection of the rights concerning religion in the Constitution, 1996. The divergent methods followed by the High Court and the Constitutional Court in deciding the application and appeal of Christian Education South Africa respectively are analysed, characterised and compared. The merits and weaknesses of the methods followed by the courts in this case are highlighted. This assessment is made against the background of the question whether persons who take their religious convictions seriously may have the expectation that their rights concerning religion will be effectively protected by South African courts.
In this article an investigation is conducted into the methods of interpretation followed by specific courts in the adjudication of disputes concerning rights pertaining to religion. This inquiry takes place against the backdrop of an exposition of the protection of the rights concerning religion in the Constitution, 1996. The divergent methods followed by the High Court and the Constitutional Court in deciding the application and appeal of Christian Education South Africa respectively are analysed, characterised and compared. The merits and weaknesses of the methods followed by the courts in this case are highlighted. This assessment is made against the background of the question whether persons who take their religious convictions seriously may have the expectation that their rights concerning religion will be effectively protected by South African courts.
Keywords
Christian Education South Africa; Constitution 1996; Section 15 31 36; Corporal Punishment; Freedom Of Religion; Freedom Of Religion And Rights Pertaining To Religion; Method Of Interpretation
Metrics
Total abstract views: 1085Total article views: 1701
Reader Comments
Before posting a comment, read our privacy policy.Post a comment (login required)