An evaluation of South Africa's legislation to combat organised crime
- Authors: Nkosi, Zaba Philip
- Date: 2011
- Subjects: Criminal law , Legislation -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10170 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/1566 , Criminal law , Legislation -- South Africa
- Description: Organised crime is a global phenomenon. It is a problem in South Africa as it is a problem in most countries. International and regional organisations, in particular, United Nations, Financial Action Task Force (FATF), and African Union (AU), have developed legislative measures and laid down minimum standards to assist party and non-party states to combat the scourge. Member countries and signatories to those instruments are ever encouraged to bring about national legislative and regulatory frameworks to criminalise predicate crimes, curb money laundering, confiscate instrumentalities and proceeds of such crimes, and to co-operate amongst themselves in their endeavours to fight the scourge. South Africa is a signatory and state party to the Vienna Convention, the Palermo Convention, African Union conventions, Southern African Development Community protocols, and has embraced Financial Action Task Force Forty Recommendations. As a signatory and a state party to these instruments, South Africa has passed, in its parliament, a vast array of legislative tools aimed at complimenting the criminalisation of organised crime related conduct (thus extending range of predicate crimes, and has also put in place preventative measures to be taken by financial, non-financial and professional institutions against money laundering practices, in order to deny organised criminals of illicit proceeds and a further use of property as an instrument of crime. The legislative framework is also aimed to foster international co-operation in the form of mutual assistance, extradition and enforcement of foreign judgements and sentences. There is a public perception, though, that crime pays in South Africa. The general public perception is that crime pays because the laws of the country always lag behind the ingenuity of organised criminals who, it is believed, are always a step or two ahead in better organisation of their nefarious activities and in the use of sophisticated methods of execution to achieve their goals. The objective of this research is to evaluate existing South African laws intended to deal with organised crime with relevant international instruments in order to establish whether the laws are adequate and are being implemented effectively to fight the scourge. The hypothesis of this research project is that South Africa has adequate laws (compliance); however, the problem lies in their implementation (enforcement). To obtain the necessary information to achieve the said objectives, the views made by various writers on organised crime were considered. The legislation currently in place to combat organised crime was identified and measured against aforementioned instruments in order to establish whether they do achieve the minimum standards set for the fight against organised crime. The comparison was done following the perspectives contained in these instruments in chapter form. In this regard, over-achievements as well as under-achievements were highlighted. For an example, article 6 of the Palermo convention instructs state parties to include as predicate offences all serious crime, punishable by maximum deprivation of liberty of at least 4 years or more, for money laundering. The Prevention of Organised Crime Act (POCA), on the other hand, contains no list of specific predicate offences, but makes an open-ended reference to the „proceeds of unlawful activities‟. It is, therefore, all-encompassing. Another example can be found in the South African definition of corruption. The South African statutory definition penalises corruption „in the widest sense and in all its forms, whereas that in the Palermo Convention is limited or restricted, as it does not instruct for the criminalisation of corruption involving foreign public officials or international civil servants. The evaluation of existing South African laws shows that South Africa has adequate laws to fight organised crime. There is, however, a room for improvement in their implementation, particularly in the prosecution of organised crimes. The South African government is urged to make available adequate financial resources to enable prosecutors to carry out their functions effectively in the fight against the scourge.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2011
Sending and receiving: immunity sought by diplomats committing criminal offences
- Authors: Moutzouris, Maria
- Date: 2009
- Subjects: Diplomatic privileges and immunities , International crimes , Criminal law , International law
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:3686 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1003201 , Diplomatic privileges and immunities , International crimes , Criminal law , International law
- Description: Diplomatic immunity is one of the oldest elements of foreign relations, dating back as far as Ancient Greece and Rome. Today, it is a principle that has been codified into the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations regulating past customs and practices. Consuls and international organizations, although their privileges and immunities are similar to diplomatic personnel, do differ and are regulated by the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and the United Nations International Immunities respectively. These Conventions have been influenced by past practices and by three theories during different era’s namely exterritoriality, personal representation and functional necessity. The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations further provides certain immunities and privileges to different levels of diplomatic officials, their staff and families. Privileges and immunities will be considered under various main categories, namely the diplomatic mission, the diplomatic official, diplomatic staff, and families. Each category receives privileges and immunities, for example immunities enjoyed by the diplomatic mission include mission correspondence and bags. Diplomatic officials enjoy personal inviolability, immunity from jurisdiction and inviolability of diplomats’ residences and property. The staff and families of diplomatic officials too enjoy privileges and immunities. The problem of so many people receiving privileges and immunities is that there is a high likelihood of abuse. Abuses that arise are various crimes committed by diplomats, their staff and families. They are immune from local punishment and appear to be above the local law. Although the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations provides remedies against diplomats, staff and families who abuse their position, it gives the impression that it is not enough. Various Acts in the United Kingdom, United States and the Republic of South Africa will be analysed in order to ascertain what governments have done to try and curb diplomatic abuses. Each will be considered and found that although they have restricted immunity from previous practices it still places the diplomats’ needs above its own citizens. Thus several suggestions have been put forward and argued whether they are successful in restricting immunity comprehensively. Such suggestions are amending the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations; using the functional necessity theory to further limit immunity; forming bilateral treaties between States as a possible means to restrict or limit; and lastly establishing a Permanent International Diplomatic Criminal Court. The key question to be answered is whether diplomatic immunity is needed for the efficient functioning of foreign relations between States.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2009