The right to privacy in the decrmimalisatioii of psilocybin mushrooms in South Africa

Sebastian William Foster
{"title":"The right to privacy in the decrmimalisatioii of psilocybin mushrooms in South Africa","authors":"Sebastian William Foster","doi":"10.17159/2077-4907/2023/ldd.v27.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article assesses the right to privacy as a ground for challenging the constitutionality of the criminalisation of psilocybin mushrooms. In doing so, it discusses the right to privacy as found in section 14 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (Constitution). Drawing on Constitutional Court case law, the article argues that the right to privacy is a fundamental right that deserves paramount protection, even in instances where individuals engage in illicit activities within the confines of their personal realm of privacy. Accordingly, the prohibiting laws, notably the Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act 140 of 1992 and the Medicines and Related Substances Act 101 of 1965, do prima facie limit an individual's right to privacy, and therefore an analysis in terms of section 36 of the Constitution is necessary. A section-36 limitations analysis is accordingly presented, through which it is concluded that the nature and importance of the limited right outweighs the importance and purpose of the criminalisation. This paper argues that the current articles of legislation, which criminalise psilocybin mushrooms, are not justifiable, in that they unjustifiably limit the right to privacy. As such, the criminalisation of psilocybin mushrooms falls short of the standards implemented in section 36 of the Constitution and is concluded to be unconstitutional.","PeriodicalId":341103,"journal":{"name":"Law, Democracy and Development","volume":"49 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law, Democracy and Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17159/2077-4907/2023/ldd.v27.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This article assesses the right to privacy as a ground for challenging the constitutionality of the criminalisation of psilocybin mushrooms. In doing so, it discusses the right to privacy as found in section 14 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (Constitution). Drawing on Constitutional Court case law, the article argues that the right to privacy is a fundamental right that deserves paramount protection, even in instances where individuals engage in illicit activities within the confines of their personal realm of privacy. Accordingly, the prohibiting laws, notably the Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act 140 of 1992 and the Medicines and Related Substances Act 101 of 1965, do prima facie limit an individual's right to privacy, and therefore an analysis in terms of section 36 of the Constitution is necessary. A section-36 limitations analysis is accordingly presented, through which it is concluded that the nature and importance of the limited right outweighs the importance and purpose of the criminalisation. This paper argues that the current articles of legislation, which criminalise psilocybin mushrooms, are not justifiable, in that they unjustifiably limit the right to privacy. As such, the criminalisation of psilocybin mushrooms falls short of the standards implemented in section 36 of the Constitution and is concluded to be unconstitutional.
南非裸盖菇素合法化过程中的隐私权
本文评估了隐私权作为挑战裸盖菇定罪合宪性的基础。在此过程中,它讨论了1996年《南非共和国宪法》(《宪法》)第14节规定的隐私权。根据宪法法院的判例法,该条认为隐私权是一项基本权利,应该得到最高的保护,即使个人在其个人隐私领域范围内从事非法活动也是如此。因此,禁止法律,特别是1992年第140号《毒品和毒品贩运法》和1965年第101号《药品和相关物质法》,表面上确实限制了个人的隐私权,因此有必要根据《宪法》第36条进行分析。因此,对第36节的限制进行了分析,由此得出的结论是,有限权利的性质和重要性超过了定罪的重要性和目的。本文认为,现行的立法条款将裸盖菇素蘑菇定为刑事犯罪是不合理的,因为它们不合理地限制了隐私权。因此,将裸盖菇素蘑菇定为刑事犯罪不符合《宪法》第36条所执行的标准,并被认定为违宪。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信