FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3125458413> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3125458413 startingPage "481" @default.
• W3125458413 abstract "I. INTRODUCTIONThe year 2012 was a banner year for policy development regarding the judicial system in South Africa. In February, the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development (DOJCD) released the Discussion Document on the Transformation of the Judicial System and the Role of the Judiciary in the Developmental South African State.1 In March, the DOJCD published the terms of reference for assessment on how the decisions of the Constitutional Court advance social transformation and the reconstruction of the South African law in general.2 In June, the African National Congress (ANC) 4th National Policy Conference held at Mangaung in the province of the Free State approved a recommendation as follows:The ANC reaffirms the position that the branches of the state are co-equal parties entrusted with distinct constitutional powers in their quest to realise the ideals of a democratic South Africa. Each branch of the state must therefore observe the constitutional limits on its own power and authority and that no branch is superior to others in its service of the Constitution.3Finally, in November, the National Assembly passed the Constitution Seventeenth Amendment Act of 2012 changing the constitutional mandate for the structure of the judiciary.4These events may all be seen as markers for linked, but ultimately disjointed, significant policy initiatives regarding the place of the judiciary in South African governance. However, because the implementation of these initiatives has continued in the year following these events-2013-this is an opportune moment to reflect on this process and the resulting policies. It is particularly important to pause and review these developments at this instant as each of these policy initiatives continues to hold significant potential for effecting change in the existing South African policy on the judiciary. The significance of these policy processes is further delineated by the amount of shock, awe, smoke, and ink spilled over the judiciary and the 2012 debate regarding the separation of powers-as well as the related topic of transformation, in particular the transformation of the bench.When the necessary distinctions are made among these policy initiatives and when their implementation paths are sketched out, a surprising set of conclusions may be drawn. First, despite formal ANC policy clearly preferring virtually no role for the judiciary in governance, the DOJCD, a group spearheaded by the ANC, is engaged in at least two processes-namely, the discussion document and the assessment-that have the potential to both formally recognize and strengthen the capacity of the judiciary to engage in governance. Second, despite the sharp rhetoric and the acrimonious debates of 2012, there exist more points of consensus than of contention regarding the shape and place of the judiciary in South Africa in the medium-term future. Third, the policy debate about the role of the judiciary in governance remains constrained by a number of factors including: divergent views on the separation of powers, a lack of transparency that exacerbates suspicions, perceptions of hidden agendas, mistrust, a largely untransformed legal profession, a lack of appreciation of the role of the media in debates over South African law and policy, and a failure by the South African state, including the judiciary, to come to terms with the increasing role of the judiciary as a regulator.In aggregate, the policy process is congested and slow if not stalled, yet it exhibits a fairly high degree of common understanding among the significant players. This is the case despite the regular battles over transformation and judicial selection. Drawing directly from these four policy events, the final section of this Article explores an alternative way of conceptualizing the current debates on the role of the judiciary. From a regulatory perspective, the debates and the various policy processes described in this Article may be seen as instances of overlapping articulations of different logics of justification for regulating the judiciary: legislative mandate, accountability/control, due process, expertise, and efficiency. …" @default.
• W3125458413 created "2021-02-01" @default.
• W3125458413 creator A5024416906 @default.
• W3125458413 date "2015-01-01" @default.
• W3125458413 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W3125458413 title "Transformation of the Judicial System in South Africa, 2012-2013" @default.
• W3125458413 hasPublicationYear "2015" @default.
• W3125458413 type Work @default.
• W3125458413 sameAs 3125458413 @default.
• W3125458413 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W3125458413 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W3125458413 hasAuthorship W3125458413A5024416906 @default.
• W3125458413 hasConcept C11413529 @default.
• W3125458413 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W3125458413 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W3125458413 hasConcept C2775884135 @default.
• W3125458413 hasConcept C2776154427 @default.
• W3125458413 hasConcept C2778272461 @default.
• W3125458413 hasConcept C2778645526 @default.
• W3125458413 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W3125458413 hasConcept C48103436 @default.
• W3125458413 hasConcept C48764862 @default.
• W3125458413 hasConcept C555826173 @default.
• W3125458413 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W3125458413 hasConceptScore W3125458413C11413529 @default.
• W3125458413 hasConceptScore W3125458413C17744445 @default.
• W3125458413 hasConceptScore W3125458413C199539241 @default.
• W3125458413 hasConceptScore W3125458413C2775884135 @default.
• W3125458413 hasConceptScore W3125458413C2776154427 @default.
• W3125458413 hasConceptScore W3125458413C2778272461 @default.
• W3125458413 hasConceptScore W3125458413C2778645526 @default.
• W3125458413 hasConceptScore W3125458413C41008148 @default.
• W3125458413 hasConceptScore W3125458413C48103436 @default.
• W3125458413 hasConceptScore W3125458413C48764862 @default.
• W3125458413 hasConceptScore W3125458413C555826173 @default.
• W3125458413 hasConceptScore W3125458413C94625758 @default.
• W3125458413 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W3125458413 hasLocation W31254584131 @default.
• W3125458413 hasOpenAccess W3125458413 @default.
• W3125458413 hasPrimaryLocation W31254584131 @default.
• W3125458413 hasRelatedWork W1524673772 @default.
• W3125458413 hasRelatedWork W1564292923 @default.
• W3125458413 hasRelatedWork W1566660703 @default.
• W3125458413 hasRelatedWork W1602362271 @default.
• W3125458413 hasRelatedWork W2014105951 @default.
• W3125458413 hasRelatedWork W213113639 @default.
• W3125458413 hasRelatedWork W2168937859 @default.
• W3125458413 hasRelatedWork W2216026066 @default.
• W3125458413 hasRelatedWork W2317502956 @default.
• W3125458413 hasRelatedWork W2401626492 @default.
• W3125458413 hasRelatedWork W2491887233 @default.
• W3125458413 hasRelatedWork W2562513226 @default.
• W3125458413 hasRelatedWork W2593730437 @default.
• W3125458413 hasRelatedWork W2942044730 @default.
• W3125458413 hasRelatedWork W2946063521 @default.
• W3125458413 hasRelatedWork W3010669598 @default.
• W3125458413 hasRelatedWork W309210594 @default.
• W3125458413 hasRelatedWork W3177312895 @default.
• W3125458413 hasRelatedWork W3190239613 @default.
• W3125458413 hasRelatedWork W3195991210 @default.
• W3125458413 hasVolume "47" @default.
• W3125458413 isParatext "false" @default.
• W3125458413 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W3125458413 magId "3125458413" @default.
• W3125458413 workType "article" @default.