SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.53 número1The impact of the COVID-19 regulations on rent obligationsDawn of a new era for permanent life partners: from Volks v Robinson to Bwanya v Master of the High Court índice de autoresíndice de assuntospesquisa de artigos
Home Pagelista alfabética de periódicos  

Serviços Personalizados

Artigo

Indicadores

Links relacionados

  • Em processo de indexaçãoCitado por Google
  • Em processo de indexaçãoSimilares em Google

Compartilhar


De Jure Law Journal

versão On-line ISSN 2225-7160
versão impressa ISSN 1466-3597

Resumo

FUO, Oliver. Rethinking the regulation of university students' protests in light of Mlungwana v The State 2018 ZACC 45. De Jure (Pretoria) [online]. 2020, vol.53, n.1, pp.369-392. ISSN 2225-7160.  http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/2225-7160/2020/v53a23.

On 19 November 2018, the Constitutional Court handed down an important judgment in Mlungwana v The State 2018 ZACC 45 that declared section 12(1)(a) of the Regulation of Gatherings Act 205 of 1993 unconstitutional because it unjustifiably limited the right of everyone to, peacefully and unarmed, assemble, demonstrate, picket and present petitions in section 17 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. Section 12(1)(a) of the Act was found constitutionally invalid to the extent that it makes the failure to give notice or the giving of inadequate notice by any person who convenes a gathering a criminal offence. In arriving to its decision, the Court held that the limitation imposed by section 12(1)(a) of the Act on the right to freedom of assembly did not meet the requirements in section 36 of the Constitution. The Constitutional Court's judgment in the Mlungwana case has caught the interests of legal scholars and has already generated a journal article and a case note. The existing scholarship on this case has focused on analysing the correctness of the Court's reasoning and on what South African municipalities can learn from it. This article departs from this emerging body of scholarship by critically analysing the implications of the Court's jurisprudence in the Mlungwana case for the regulation of university students' protests in South Africa. Drawing examples from policies and regulations of some universities outlining the process for students' protests and the consequences for non-compliance with notice and authorisation procedures, this article argues that universities generally have to rethink how they regulate students' protests in order to comply with the Court's jurisprudence emanating from the Mlungwana case. It is argued that in their current form, the policy positions of some universities are inconsistent with the rights of students in section 17 of the Constitution and the concomitant duties of universities emanating from the Bill of Rights.

        · texto em Inglês     · Inglês ( pdf )

 

Creative Commons License Todo o conteúdo deste periódico, exceto onde está identificado, está licenciado sob uma Licença Creative Commons