Essay LLB Law about The Traditional Courts Bill [B1D-2017]
7 views 0 purchase
Course
LLB Law
Institution
University Of Johannesburg (UJ)
Providing a brief academic essay about The Traditional Courts Bill [B1D-2017]. This essay has touched on the opinions of those supporting and opposing the Bill. This essay concludes by determining if The Traditional Courts Bill [B1D-2017] is effective or just a piece of writing in the form of legis...
INTRODUCTION:
In this Journal entry, the aim is to provide brief information about The Traditional
Courts Bill [B1D-2017]. In doing so, the controversy caused by the passing of this bill
by the Legislature will also be included in this Journal entry. This Journal entry will
also discuss the opinions of those supporting and opposing the Bill.
The Traditional Courts Bill [B1D-2017] was passed by Parliament to ensure a
consistent legal foundation for the organisation and operation of traditional courts in
South Africa. It was introduction in 2008 and has been amended consistently. It was
withdrawn in 2011 as a result of public criticism. It repealed the provisions of the Black
administration Act of 1927 that were unconstitutional. The bill was passed for, inter
alia, the Customary Courts. The bill has however caused some controversy, with some
parties supporting and some opposing it.
Parties that support it claim that it enables justice accessible to the marginalised
groups of South Africa. They also claim that citizens who would not have access to
justice due to financial constraints are no longer deprived of their constitutional right
to access to justice as the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 states.
They claim that the bill ensures that South Africa still considers Customary law as a
primary source of law.
Parties that oppose it claim that the Traditional Courts Bill does not consider the role
that community councils play in traditional dispute- resolution procedures at the local
levels where the system functions optimally. They claim that more authority is granted
to senior traditional leaders who are mostly men, which deprives the minority of their
constitutional right to equality as they are partially considered by the bill. They further
claim that the bill grants the courts sole jurisdiction in handling extreme charges, for
instance when one is banished without considering the community’s opinions, which
in their regard infringes on historical customary protection.
One of the provisions transmitted in the bill that contradicts with reality is Section 5(1)
of The Traditional Courts Bill [B1D-2017] which states that, members of the traditional
courts must comprise of both men and woman In accordance with section 9 of the
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller mthobisisimelane. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $3.92. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
