Masters Degrees (Public Law)

Permanent URI for this collection

https://scholar.sun.ac.za/handle/10019.1/3636

Browse

Browsing Masters Degrees (Public Law) by Subject "Administrative law -- South Africa"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The absence of a system of internal controls in South African Administrative Law, in light of Section 7(2) of the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000
    (Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University, 2020-12) Heydenrych, Ernst; Quinot, Geo; Stellenbosch University. Faculty of Law. Dept. of Public Law.
    ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Section 33 of the Constitution envisions a lawful, reasonable and procedurally fair manner of obtaining administrative justice. Coupled with the project of Transformative Constitutionalism, which seeks to create a culture of justification, the hope was that South Africa’s public administration would become more open, accountable and efficient. The primary mechanism through which the above occurs, is judicial review. However, its time-consuming and costly nature means that a large portion of South African society cannot gain access to the court system. Furthermore, courts have often held that the public administration is better suited to deal with certain matters, as courts may lack the necessary expertise to address a particular administrative matter adequately. Thus, there is a need to find alternative methods for holding the public administration accountable. One such method, is by way of the exhaustion of internal remedies. Section 7(2)(a) of the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000 holds that an applicant for judicial review must first exhaust any and all available internal remedies before approaching a review court. Should the applicant fail to do so, the court is obliged to direct said applicant to first exhaust the available internal remedies (section 7(2)(b)), unless the court grants an exemption (section 7(2)(c)). However, members of the public have no general right to an internal remedy, nor is there a duty on the state to provide an aggrieved party with one. South African administrative law currently lacks a uniform system of internal controls (remedies), and whether or not an aggrieved party will have an internal remedy to exhaust, will depend on the context of each case. Accordingly, this thesis argues in favour of the creation and implementation of a uniform system of internal controls by the state, by relying on four main points: (a) section 33 of the Constitution; (b) the project of Transformative Constitutionalism; (c) the impact of poverty on the attainment of administrative justice; and (d) the duty to exhaust domestic remedies under international law. Should the above argument be accepted, then focus must shift to the content and scope of an effective internal remedy. By way of analysis of various statutory frameworks containing existing internal remedies, nine criteria are identified, which should inform the decision-making of the state when formulating the content and scope of an effective internal remedy.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Grounds for review of administrative action : the interaction between the constitution, the act and the common law
    (Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University, 2000-12) Hopkins, Elana; Van der Walt, Andre; Stellenbosch University. Faculty of Law. Dept. of Public Law.
    ENGLISH ABSTRACT: South African administrative law has undergone drastic changes since the inception of the interim Constitution, which elevated 'administrative justice' to a constitutionally entrenched fundamental right in section 24. Although the successor of this section, the 'must administrative action' clause in section 33 FC, did not enter into force on 5 February 1996 with the rest of the Constitution, it required more changes to administrative law in the form of legislation, when read together with item 23 Schedule 6 FC. The two most significant factors that brought about change were the passage of the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000 in terms of section 33 FC read with item 23 Schedule 6, and the ruling of the Constitutional Court in the Pharmaceutical Manufacturers case. This study shows that in order to give effect to the requirements of the Constitution, the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act and the ruling of the Constitutional Court, administrative law must be reorganised. When this happens, section 33 FC, which gives force to the common law that informs administrative law, becomes the starting point in administrative law matters. Although the Act exists under the Constitution and parallel to the common law, Parliament foresees that the Act and the common law will in time become one system of law. It further provides for the direct application of the Constitution by those who cannot find a remedy in the Act. The study further shows that, as not all the common law constitutional principles that previously provided the common law grounds for review of administrative action have been taken up by the Constitution, the possibility exists that some of the common law grounds do not continue to be relevant to the review of administrative action. The Act, which articulates the right to 'just administrative action' as viewed by government, contains most of the common law grounds for review. It is therefore argued that, after the Act has entered into force, the continued relevance of those that have been omitted from the Act, needs to be determined before they can be used through the direct application of section 33 FC. To test for relevance, the requirements in section 33(1) Fe, 'lawfulness', reasonableness' and 'procedural fairness', are therefore interpreted in the study in order to determine which statutory grounds relate to each and which common law grounds have been omitted from the Act. The conclusion reached is that grounds available for the review of administrative action consist of the statutory grounds for review together with the omitted common law grounds that continue to be relevant to the judicial review of administrative action.