Publisiteitsbevele as Vonnisopsie vir Regspersone - Publicity Orders as Sentencing Option for Juristic Persons

This constribution addresses the issue of adverse publicity orders as a possible supplementary sentencing option for corporate offenders. In South Africa the fine is the primary sentencing option available to courts when imposing sentences on juristic persons. Fines, however, do not adequately serve the purposes of corporate sentencing. Publicity orders require the publication of an offender's conviction, sentence and the details of the offence to individulas or a group of persons (such as shareholders). An adverse publication order damages the corporate offender's reputation - a valuable asset to a corporate entity. It therefore serves the purposes of corporate deterrence. In this contribution criticim is levelled against the fine as primary sentencing option for juristic persons, the notion of corporate reputation is considered from a social and a legal perspective; a functional comparative study of adverse publication orders is presented and recommendations are made regarding the content of effective publicity orders.     &nbsp

Arrests without warrant: the SCA brings clarity - Minister of Safety and Security v Sekhoto 2011 1 SACR 315 (SCA); [2011] 2 All SA 157 (SCA): case

Section 40(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 provides for a number of different instances where a peace officer may effect an arrest without an arrest warrant. A perusal of the reported case law pertaining to the lawfulness of arrests without warrant reveals that section 40(1)(b) of the Act, in particular, has received much attention from the courts. In terms of this subsection a peace officer may arrest without warrant any person whom he reasonably suspects of having committed an offence referred to in Schedule 1, other than the offence of escaping from lawful custody. It is settled law that any deprivation of freedom is regarded as prima facie unlawful. The arrestor therefore bears the onus of proving that the arrest was justified (Minister of Law and Order v Hurley 1986 3 SA 568 (A) 589E-F; and Ralekwa v Minister of Safety and Security 2004 1 SACR 131 (T) par [9]). The following jurisdictional facts must be present for a peace officer to rely on the defence created by section 40(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act in cases, where it is alleged that the arrest was unlawful: (i) the arrestor must be a peace officer; (ii) the arrestor must entertain a suspicion; (iii) the suspicion must be that the suspect committed an offence in Schedule 1; and (iv) the suspicion must rest on reasonable grounds (Duncan v Minister of Law and Order 1986 2 SA 805 818G-H). For a discussion of the different types of jurisdictional facts provided for in section 40(1) see Watney ("'n Klemverskuiwing by Inhegtenisneming Sonder Lasbrief" 2009 TSAR 734-735)

THE SEARCH WARRANT PROVISIONS OF THE CYBERCRIMES ACT AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT

The recently enacted Cybercrimes Act 19 of 2020 regulates the powers of the police and investigators to investigate cybercrimes. Chapter 4 of the Act provides for the powers of the police and others in respect of search, access or seizure in the investigation of cybercrimes and other offences committed by means of cybertechnology. The provisions of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 will continue to operate in addition to the provisions of the Cybercrimes Act, to the extent that the Criminal Procedure Act is not inconsistent with the Cybercrimes Act. The search and seizure provisions of the Criminal Procedure Act are object-based, as they do not deal explicitly with the specialised procedures that are required to investigate cybercrimes or other offences that involve the use of digital devices. The Cybercrimes Act attempts to address this shortcoming. The coexistence of the search and seizure provisions in these two Acts may cause difficulties in the fight against crime. In addition to the validity requirements of search warrants, as set out in the Acts, additional intelligibility requirements for the validity of search warrants have been developed by the courts

Korporatiewe identiteit as die basis van strafregtelike aanspreeklikheid van regspersone (2): Die Praktyk

The shortcomings of individualist models of corporate criminal liability have led to the development of more realistic approaches to the criminal liability of juristic persons. In this contribution two legislative attempts to impose criminal liability on corporations based on their unique corporate identity or corporate ethos are critically discussed. The Criminal Code Act of 1995 applicable in the Commonwealth of Australia provides that the fault element of an offence must be attributed to a corporate body if that body expressly, tacitly or impliedly authorised or permitted the commission of the offence. One of the manners in which the authorisation or permission for the offence may be established is by having regard to the corporate culture which had existed within the body corporate that directed, encouraged or tolerated the criminal conduct. This approach is often regarded as the most sophisticated and comprehensive model for corporate criminal liability. The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act of the United Kingdom of 2007 provides that a jury may take into consideration the extent to which the evidence shows that there were attitudes, policies, systems or accepted practices within an organisation that were likely to have encouraged failure to comply with health and safety legislation. The corporate culture or corporate identity model is not the exclusive model of attribution in these jurisdictions. It does, however, go a long way towards recognising true corporate or organisational fault. Corporate acts are not merely reduced to the fault of individuals but are rather based on the manner in which the corporation is structured.http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/pelj.v14i2.

A review of correlations to model the packing structure and effective thermal conductivity in packed beds of mono-sized spherical particles

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2010.03.00

The FitTrack Index as fitness indicator: A pilot study

Background: The FitTrack Index is a web-based programme developed in South Africa and widely used by athletes to indicate their fitness. A need exists for a self-managed, non-invasive tool to evaluate and categorise health-related fitness in different population groups. The aim of this study was to compare the FitTrack Index with a reliable measure of cardio-respiratory fitness as indicated by maximal oxygen uptake (direct VO2max). Methods & results: During a 12-week cross-sectional, descriptive pilot study the direct laboratory tested VO2max indicated a moderate to strong correlation with the FitTrack Index (Spearman's rho = 0.439, p = 0.089 at baseline; Spearman's rho = 0.853, p < 0.001 after 12 weeks). Conclusions: These results suggest that the web-based FitTrack Index may be considered an appropriate tool to evaluate exercise capacity and cardiovascular fitness in healthy individuals following an aerobic training programme