Transcription of SOUTH AFRICAN LAW COMMISSION - Justice Home
1 1 SOUTH AFRICAN LAW COMMISSION ISSUE PAPER 11 PROJECT 82 SENTENCING MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCES Closing date for comments: 30 August 1997 ISBN: 0-621-27353-8 2 INTRODUCTION The SOUTH AFRICAN Law COMMISSION was established by the SOUTH AFRICAN Law COMMISSION Act, 1973 (Act 19 of 1973). The members of the COMMISSION are - The Honourable Mr Justice I Mahomed (Chairperson) The Honourable Mr Justice P J J Olivier (Vice-Chairperson) The Honourable Madam Justice J Y Mokgoro Professor R T Nhlapo Adv J J Gauntlett SC Ms Z Seedat Mr P Mojapelo The Secretary is Mr W Henegan. The COMMISSION 's offices are on the 8th floor, 228 Visagie Street, Pretoria. Correspondence should be addressed to: The Secretary SOUTH AFRICAN Law COMMISSION Private Bag X 668 PRETORIA 0001 Telephone : (012) 322-6440 Telefax : (012) 320-0936 E-mail : Internet site : The project leader responsible for this project is the Honourable Ms Justice L van den Heever.
2 3 PREFACE This issue paper (which reflects information gathered up to the end of March 1997) was prepared to elicit responses and to serve as a basis for the COMMISSION =s deliberations, taking into account any responses received. The views, conclusions and recommendations in this paper are accordingly not to be regarded as the COMMISSION =s final views. The issue paper is published in full so as to provide persons and bodies wishing to comment or to make suggestions for the reform of this particular branch of the law with sufficient background information to enable them to place focused submissions before the COMMISSION . The COMMISSION will assume that respondents agree to the COMMISSION quoting from or referring to comments and attributing comments to respondents, unless representations are marked confidential. Respondents should be aware that the COMMISSION may in any event be required to release information contained in representations under the Constitution of the Republic of SOUTH Africa, Act 108 of 1996.
3 Respondents are requested to submit written comments, representations or requests to the COMMISSION by 30 August 1997 at the address appearing on the previous page. The researcher will endeavour to assist you with particular difficulties you may have. Comment already forwarded to the COMMISSION should not be repeated; in such event respondents should merely indicate that they abide by their previous comment, if this is the position. The researcher allocated to this project, who may be contacted for further information, is Mr W van Vuuren. The project leader responsible for the project is The Honourable Ms Justice L van den Heever. 4 CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION (iii) PREFACE (iv) LIST OF SOURCES (viii) LIST OF CASES (ix) CHAPTER 1 1 ORIGIN OF THE INVESTIGATION 1 Introduction 1 Background 1 CHAPTER 2 4 IDENTIFYING THE ISSUES 4 Introduction
4 4 Main characteristics of sentencing in SOUTH Africa 6 * Justification for punishment 6 * Aims of punishment 7 (i)The absolute theory - retribution 7 (ii)Relative theories 8 (iii)
5 Integratrive theories 9 * The legislative framework of sentencing in SOUTH Africa 9 * The court=s discretion in sentencing 12 * Mandatory sentences 19 * The methodology in sentencing adopted by our courts 20 5 PROBLEMS IN RESPECT OF THE SENTENCING PROCESS IN SOUTH AFRICA 21 CHAPTER 3 24 OPTIONS FOR SENTENCING REFORM - AN INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE 23 Background 23 SENTENCING REFORM IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 25 Background 25 Current sentencing practices in the USA 27
6 The Minnesota sentencing guidelines 29 Sentencing in the US federal jurisdiction 31 Mandatory minimum sentencing in the USA 33 Three strikes legislation in the USA 35 SENTENCING IN SWEDEN 37 Background 37 SENTENCING IN GREECE 40 SENTENCING IN GERMANY 42 SENTENCING IN ENGLAND AND WALES 43 Mandatory sentences
7 46 SENTENCING IN CANADA 47 Mandatory sentences 50 CHAPTER 4 52 POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS 52 SENTENCING PRACTICES - OPTIONS FOR REFORM 52 ENACTMENT OF SENTENCING GUIDELINES 52 6 PRESUMPTIVE SENTENCING GUIDELINES 52 VOLUNTARY SENTENCING GUIDELINES 53 THE ADOPTION OF LEGISLATIVE GUIDELINES WHICH ASSIST INDETERMINING THE CHOICE AND LENGTH OF THE PUNISHMENT 53 THE ENACTMENT OF PRINCIPLES OF SENTENCING INCLUDING GUIDELINES WHICH DETERMINE THE IMPOSITION OF IMPRISONMENT 53 THE ENACTMENT OF PRESUMPTIVE SENTENCING GUIDELINES TO GUIDE THE IMPOSITION OF CUSTODIAL AND NON-CUSTODIAL SENTENCES 54 THE ENACTMENT OF MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCES COMBINED WITH A
8 DISCRETION TO DEPART FROM THE PRESCRIBED MINIMUM 54 CHAPTER 5 55 THE WAY FORWARD 55 7 LIST OF SOURCES Adams, MA AThe Federal Sentencing Guidelines as Legal Process Jurisprudence@ American Criminal Law Review Vol 31 259. Ashworth, AJ ACriminal Justice and deserved sentences@ Criminal Law Review 1989 36 340-55. Canadian Sentencing COMMISSION Sentencing Reform: A Canadian Approach February 1987 Clarkson, C, Morgan, R The Politics of Sentencing Reform Clarendon Press: Oxford 1995.
9 COMMISSION of Enquiry into the Penal System of the Republic of SOUTH Africa, 1971 RP Government Printer. Frase, RS ASentencing Guidelines in Minnesota and other American States: A Progress Report@ in The Politics of Sentencing Reform 1995 169. ARecent Legislation@ Harvard Law Review Vol 107 2123. Henham, R AThe European Context of Sentencing Violent Offenders@ International Journal of Sociology of Law 1993 Vol 21 265 -280; Henham, R ABack to the Future on Sentencing: The 1996 White Paper@ The Modern Law Review Vol 59 November 1996 861. Jareborg, Nils AThe Swedish Sentencing Reform@ in The Politics of Sentencing Reform edited by C Clarkson and R Morgan Clarendon Press: Oxford 1995. Nairn, RG ASentencing S v Young 1977 1 SA 602 (A)@ 1977 SACC 189-191. Rabie, MA, Strauss, SA Punishment: An introduction to principles fourth edition Lex Patria 1985. United States Sentencing COMMISSION , Special Report to the Congress: Mandatory Minimum Penalties in the Federal Criminal Justice System 1991.
10 Van der Merwe, DP Sentencing Juta Johannesburg. Van Rooyen, JH AThe decision to imprison - the courts= need for guidance@ 1980 SACC 228. 8 LIST OF CASES United States v Madkour 930 F. zd 234 (2d ) R v S 1956 1 SA 649 (T) R v Smith 1987 1 SCR 1045 S v B 1985 2 SA 120 (A) S v B 1980 3 SA 851 (A) S v Baptie 1963 1 PH 96 (N) S v D 1989 4 SA 209 (C) S v De Jager and Another 1965 2 SA 616 (A) S v E 1992 2 SACR 625 (A) S v George 1992 1 SACR 250 (W) S v Holder 1979 2 SA 70 (A) S v Khumalo 1973 3 SA 697 (A) S v Khumalo 1984 3 SA 327 (A) S v M 1976 3 SA 644 (A) S v M 1990 2 SACR 509 (E) S v Makhele 1994 1 SACR 7 (O) S v Makwanyane and another 1995 2 SACR 1 (CC) S v N 1988 3 SA 450 (A) Persadh v R 1944 NPD 357 S v Petkar 1988 3 SA 571 (A). S v Pieters 1987 3 717 (A) S v Pillay 1977 4 SA 531 (A). S v R 1993 1 SACR 209 (A) 9 S v S 1977 3 SA 830 (D) S v Scheepers 1977 2SA 155 (A) S v Sparks 1972 3 SA 396 (A) S v Toms: S v Bruce 1990 2 SA 802 (A) S v Victor 1970 (1) SA 427 (A) S v Williams and others 1995 2 251 (CC) S v Young 1977 1 SA 602 (A) S v Zinn 1969 2 SA 537 (A) 10 CHAPTER 1 ORIGIN OF THE INVESTIGATION Introduction During 1996 the Minister of Justice appointed a new project committee for the COMMISSION =s investigation, on an ongoing basis, of all aspects of sentencing.
