Department of Public Law
Permanent URI for this community
Browse
Browsing Department of Public Law by browse.metadata.advisor "Buur, Lars"
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Results Per Page
Sort Options
- ItemCrime as punishment: A legal perspective on vigilantism in South Africa(Stellenbosch University, 2016-12) Nel, Mary; Kemp, Gerhard; Buur, Lars; Stellenbosch University. Faculty of Law. Dept. of Public LawENGLISH ABSTRACT : This study aims to remedy a gap in legal literature by addressing the phenomenon of vigilantism from a legal perspective, and seeking to conceptualise and understand the problem. To this end, it first arrives at a working definition of vigilantism for a legal context by critically analysing previous (non-legal) efforts to define vigilantism and identifying and discussing elements of a proposed crime of vigilantism. The focus then shifts to interrogating the relationship between (the erosion of) state legitimacy and vigilante self-help. After demonstrating the usefulness of the concept of legitimacy as an overarching framework for understanding the state-vigilante relationship, three dimensions of legitimacy (legal, normative and demonstrative) are explained and the assumed nexus between (deficient) state legitimacy and vigilantism is clarified. Next, factors precipitating state delegitimation in the criminal justice context are identified so as better to grasp the role of deficient state legitimacy in fostering vigilantism – and concomitantly, how the state might remedy such shortcomings. While it is argued that state delegitimation is by no means the only factor contributing to the emergence and prevalence of vigilantism, a common thread running through many vigilante narratives is that the failure of criminal justice agents to do their job properly opens a law-and-order gap that vigilantes are only too willing to fill with their own brand of “justice”. To appreciate the role played by vigilantes as informal criminal justice “providers”, vigilante counter-legitimation strategies and rituals are then explored. They are compared to those utilised by their formal counterparts, with the aim of better delineating the common ground (or lack thereof) between state-sanctioned criminal justice and vigilantism. Thereafter, various divergent state responses to vigilantism are outlined and critically evaluated, divided into chapters focusing on state relegitimation strategies premised on exclusion (e.g., criminal prosecution) and inclusion (e.g., restorative justice). The emphasis throughout is on how to address vigilantism in such a way as to balance a non-negotiable respect for human rights with the need to respond to pressing community order and security concerns. It is concluded that vigilantes may indeed be willing to abandon violent means of problem-solving sufficiently to legitimate – and work in partnership with – a formal criminal justice system committed to addressing issues of crime and disorder in a community-responsive, inclusive, respectful and restorative manner.