Revising spousal testimonial privilege and marital communications privilege in South African criminal procedure: Is abolition or extension the answer? Part 2

Samantha Goosen, N. Whitear-Nel
{"title":"Revising spousal testimonial privilege and marital communications privilege in South African criminal procedure: Is abolition or extension the answer? Part 2","authors":"Samantha Goosen, N. Whitear-Nel","doi":"10.47348/SACJ/V33/I3A5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although South Africa has not directly grappled with whether to extend the protection of the marital privileges to cohabitant life partners, Canada has. The ‘marital privileges’ refer to spousal testimonial privilege and marital communications privilege, collectively, in this article. In 2015, the Canadian legislature abolished spousal testimonial privilege. The marital communications privilege has been retained, and the Canadian courts have considered whether to extend it to cohabitant life partners or abolish it. To gain perspective on whether the marital privileges in South Africa should be retained but reformed, the authors discuss the position in Canada, a constitutionally comparable democracy. The authors consider the scope and applicability of the marital privileges before and after the 2015 Canadian amendments,1 which abrogated spousal testimonial privilege. The authors discuss the abrogation of spousal testimonial privilege in Canada and consider its relevance in the South African context. Also considered is why the marital communications privilege has been retained. This research suggests that while the central rationale for retaining the marital communications privilege is to foster marital relationships and protect the right to privacy, the rationale of dignity also plays a key role. The authors also consider the decision of the European Court of Human Rights dealing with marital communications privilege in The Netherlands. Finally, it will be submitted that whichever view one takes, the marital privileges in South Africa should not be retained in their current form.","PeriodicalId":256796,"journal":{"name":"South African journal of criminal justice","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African journal of criminal justice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47348/SACJ/V33/I3A5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although South Africa has not directly grappled with whether to extend the protection of the marital privileges to cohabitant life partners, Canada has. The ‘marital privileges’ refer to spousal testimonial privilege and marital communications privilege, collectively, in this article. In 2015, the Canadian legislature abolished spousal testimonial privilege. The marital communications privilege has been retained, and the Canadian courts have considered whether to extend it to cohabitant life partners or abolish it. To gain perspective on whether the marital privileges in South Africa should be retained but reformed, the authors discuss the position in Canada, a constitutionally comparable democracy. The authors consider the scope and applicability of the marital privileges before and after the 2015 Canadian amendments,1 which abrogated spousal testimonial privilege. The authors discuss the abrogation of spousal testimonial privilege in Canada and consider its relevance in the South African context. Also considered is why the marital communications privilege has been retained. This research suggests that while the central rationale for retaining the marital communications privilege is to foster marital relationships and protect the right to privacy, the rationale of dignity also plays a key role. The authors also consider the decision of the European Court of Human Rights dealing with marital communications privilege in The Netherlands. Finally, it will be submitted that whichever view one takes, the marital privileges in South Africa should not be retained in their current form.
南非刑事诉讼中配偶证言特权和婚姻通信特权的修正:废除还是延长?第2部分
虽然南非没有直接解决是否将对婚姻特权的保护扩大到同居生活伴侣的问题,但加拿大已经解决了。在本文中,“婚姻特权”是指配偶证言特权和婚姻通信特权的统称。2015年,加拿大立法机构废除了配偶证词特权。婚姻通信特权被保留,加拿大法院已经考虑是否将其扩展到同居生活伴侣或废除它。为了了解南非的婚姻特权是否应该保留但应该改革,作者讨论了加拿大的情况,一个宪法上可与之媲美的民主国家。作者考察了2015年加拿大修正案1废除配偶证言特权前后婚姻特权的范围和适用性。作者讨论了配偶证明特权在加拿大的废除,并考虑其在南非背景下的相关性。还考虑到为什么婚姻通信特权被保留。本研究表明,虽然保留婚姻通信特权的核心理由是促进婚姻关系和保护隐私权,但尊严的理由也起着关键作用。作者还审议了欧洲人权法院关于荷兰婚姻通信特权的决定。最后,有人提出,无论持何种观点,南非的婚姻特权都不应以目前的形式保留。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信