Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorVan der Walt, A. J.en_ZA
dc.contributor.authorBrand, Jacobus Frederick Daniel (Danie)en_ZA
dc.contributor.otherUniversity of Stellenbosch. Faculty of Law. Dept. of Public Law.
dc.date.accessioned2009-09-03T14:45:41Zen_ZA
dc.date.accessioned2010-06-01T08:18:51Z
dc.date.available2009-09-03T14:45:41Zen_ZA
dc.date.available2010-06-01T08:18:51Z
dc.date.issued2009-03en_ZA
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/1333
dc.descriptionThesis (LLD (Public Law))—University of Stellenbosch, 2009.
dc.description.abstractENGLISH SUMMARY: The point of departure of this dissertation is that transformation in South Africa depends on transformative politics – extra-institutional, substantive, oppositional, transformation-oriented politics. One challenge South Africa’s constitution therefore poses to courts is to take account of the impact of adjudication on transformative politics. The purpose of this dissertation is to investigate the relationship between adjudication and transformative politics within a specific context – adjudication of socio-economic rights cases. This relationship is commonly described in a positive light – either that adjudication of socio-economic rights cases promotes transformative politics by giving impoverished people access to the basic resources required for political participation; or that adjudication of such cases is in itself a space for transformative politics. Although there is much truth in both these descriptions, both under-estimate the extent to which adjudication also limits transformative politics. This dissertation focuses on the extent to which adjudication limits transformative politics – it comprises an analysis of socio-economic rights cases with the aim of showing how adjudication of these cases, despite positive results, also limited transformative politics. The theoretical aspects of this problem are outlined in the first chapter. After a description of the body of case law on which the analysis focuses two chapters follow in which two ways in which adjudication limits transformative politics are investigated. The first traces how courts in socio-economic rights cases participate in discourses about impoverishment that tend to describe the problem as non-political – specifically how courts tend to describe impoverishment as technical rather than political in nature; and how courts implicitly legitimise in their judgments liberal-capitalist views of impoverishment that insist that impoverishment is best addressed through the unregulated market. Then follows a chapter investigating how views of legal interpretation in terms of which legal materials have a certain and determinable meaning that can be mechanically found by courts limit transformative politics by insulating adjudication from critique and emphasising finality in adjudication. Throughout it is shown how courts can mitigate the limiting effects of adjudication, by legitimating the political agency of impoverished people, by using remedies requiring political engagement between opponents and postponing closure in adjudication, and by adopting a different approach to interpretation, that emphasises the pliability and relative indeterminacy of legal materials. Despite this, the conclusion of the dissertation is that courts can never wholly avoid the limiting impact of adjudication on transformative politics, but should rather aim to remain continually aware of it.en_ZA
dc.description.abstractAFRIKAANS OPSOMMING: Die uitgangspunt van hierdie proefskrif is dat transformasie in Suid-Afrika afhang van transformatiewe politiek – buite-institusionele, substantiewe, opposisionele, transformasie-gerigte politiek. Een eis wat Suid-Afrika se grondwet daarom aan howe stel, is om ag te slaan op die impak van beregting op transformatiewe politiek. Die doel van hierdie proefskrif is om die verhouding tussen beregting en transformatiewe politiek binne ‘n spesifieke konteks – beregting van sake oor sosio-ekonomiese regte – te ondersoek. Meeste beskouinge van hierdie verhouding beskryf dit in ‘n positiewe lig - óf dat die beregting van sake oor sosio-ekonomiese regte transformatiewe politiek bevorder deur vir verarmde mense toegang tot basiese lewensmiddele te bewerkstellig sodat hulle aan politieke optrede kan deelneem; óf dat beregting van sulke sake opsigself ‘n spasie is vir transformatiewe politiek. Hoewel daar waarheid steek in beide beskrywings, onderskat hulle die mate waartoe beregting ook transformatiewe politiek kan beperk. Hierdie proefskrif fokus op hoe beregting transformatiewe politiek beperk - dit behels ‘n analise van sake oor sosio-ekonomiese regte met die doel om te wys hoe beregting van hierdie sake, ten spyte van kennelik positiewe gevolge ook transformatiewe politiek beperk het. Die teoretiese vergestalting van hierdie probleem word in die eerste hoofstuk beskou. Na ‘n beskrywing van die liggaam van regspraak waarop die analise fokus volg twee hoofstukke waarin twee maniere waarop beregting transformatiewe politiek beperk ondersoek word. Die eerste beskou hoe howe in sake oor sosio-ekonomiese regte deelneem aan diskoerse oor verarming wat neig om hierdie probleem as non-polities te beskryf - spesifiek hoe howe neig om hierdie problem as tegnies eerder as polities van aard te beskryf; en hoe howe liberaal-kapitalistiese sieninge van verarming, ingevolge waarvan verarming deur die ongereguleerde mark aangespreek behoort te word, implisiet in hul uitsprake legitimeer. Dan volg ‘n hoofstuk wat naspeur hoe sieninge van regsinterpretasie ingevolge waarvan regsmateriaal ‘n sekere en vasstelbare betekenis het wat meganies deur howe gevind word, transformatiewe politieke optrede beperk deur die openheid van beregting vir kritiek te beperk en finaliteit in beregting in die hand te werk. Deurgaans word gewys hoe howe die beperkende effek van beregting kan teëwerk, deur die politike agentskap van verarmde mense te legitimeer, deur remedies te gebruik wat politieke onderhandeling tussen opponente bewerkstellig en finale oplossings uitstel, en deur ‘n ander benadering tot interpretasie, wat die buigsaamheid en relatiewe onbepaalbaarheid van regsmateriaal erken, te omarm. Tog is die gevolgtrekking van die proefskrif dat howe nooit die beperkende effek van beregting op transformatiewe politiek geheel kan vermy nie, maar eerder deurgaans daarop bedag moet wees.en_ZA
dc.language.isoenen_ZA
dc.publisherStellenbosch : University of Stellenbosch
dc.subjectSocio-economic rightsen_ZA
dc.subjectTransformative politicsen_ZA
dc.subjectAdjudicationen_ZA
dc.subjectTheses -- Public law
dc.subjectDissertations -- Public law
dc.subjectSouth Africa -- Social conditions -- 1994-
dc.subjectCivil rights -- South Africa
dc.subjectJustice, Administration of -- Interpretation and construction -- South Africa
dc.titleCourts, socio-economic rights and transformative politicsen_ZA
dc.typeThesisen_ZA
dc.rights.holderUniversity of Stellenbosch


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record