Authored By: Mathapelo
University of South Africa
Case Name: S v Makwanyane and Another (1995)
S v Makwanyane and Another (CCT3/94) [ 1995 ] ZACC 3; 1995 (6) BCLR 665; 1995 (3) SA 391; [1996] 2 CHRLD 164; 1995 (2) SACR 1 (6 June 1995)
Facts of the case
This case involved two notorious criminals, Patrick Makwanyane and Mvuyo Mchunu that were convicted of four counts of murder, robbery, and attempted murder off which they were sentenced to death in accordance with the South African Criminal Procedure Act. The two accused appealed their case to the Constitutional Court, challenging capital punishment as unconstitutional. In South Africa, the case of S v Makwanyane is considered a landmark decision. The Constitutional Court examined whether the death penalty was in line with the principles and ideals of the newly democratic South Africa as stated in the Constitution. In this case, the Constitutional Court of South Africa ruled that capital punishment (the death penalty) violated the constitution. The court ruled that the death penalty violated the right to life and the South African Constitution’s prohibition on cruel, inhuman, and degrading punishment. Additionally, the Court determined that the death penalty disproportionately impacted vulnerable and marginalized groups in society and was an ineffective deterrent to crime. Consequently, the Court ruled that the death penalty was unconstitutional and invalidated the pertinent sections of the Criminal Procedure Act. With this ruling, South Africa became the first nation in Africa to effectively abolish the death penalty[1].
The Legal Question
The main question to this case was whether if it cruel or inhumane to put someone on death row and carry out their execution?
The central question was what impact the Interim Constitution had on the death penalty. Did the death penalty violate Section 9, 10 and 11(2), which guarantee every individual’s right to life, dignity, and freedom from torture and cruel punishment?[2]
Ratio decidendi
The main core legal reasoning of this landmark case was that capital punishment is unconstitutional. The court ruled that although the state must punish violent crimes, an individual’s rights are totally eliminated by state-sanctioned execution. The extreme nature of the death penalty could not be justified under the Constitution’s limitation clause because of the rights to life and dignity are fundamental to all other rights in the Bill of Rights.
The appeals against the sentences for attempted murder and robbery were dismissed by the Appellate Division, but the appeals against the death penalty were postponed until the constitutional issues were resolved by this Court. The Appellate Division ruling implied that these issues were referred to this Court under section 102(6) of the Constitution, even though the parties treated it as such. The ruling in State v Makwanyane had far-reaching consequences for South African law and society. It signalled a change toward a more progressive, rights-based approach to criminal justice. The verdict resulted in the elimination of the death sentence in South Africa, making it one of the few African countries to do so.[3]
Findings
The facts of the case, in which Makwanyane had received a death sentence, were not directly relevant; instead, the central question was whether the death penalty violated sections 9, 10, and 11(2) of the Interim Constitution, which guaranteed everyone the right to life, the right to dignity, and the right to be free from torture and cruel punishment. The Court unanimously determined that the death penalty was unconstitutional.[4]
Arguments for the Accused
The appellants contended that the death penalty was in violation of Chapter 3 of the interim Constitution, and they were represented as amici curiae by a number of human rights organizations. They made the following main claims, right to life the death penalty was essentially incompatible with the unalienable right to life guaranteed by the Constitution. Another one was human dignity that mentioned the fact that a person’s worth is diminished and their dignity is offended by execution.[5]
Arguments for the State
The Attorney general and the state insisted that the death penalty should continue to be a useful instrument in the criminal justice system. They believed that it served as just for worst offenses.
Conclusion
The death penalty was ultimately declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court, which decided in favour of the accused. The judge concluded that although the state and society demanded severe punishment, it could not take precedence over the basic rights to life and dignity. They emphasized that fundamental values, not popular opinion, form the basis of constitutional rights.
Bibliography
Legislation
The Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977
The Interim Constitutional Act 2000 of 1993
Journal Article
A Boshoff 2007, Sabinet African Journals: Ethics and the problems of evil: S v Makwanyane
Case Law
S v Makwanyane 1995 (6) BCLR 665 (CC).
[1] S v Makwanyane 1995
[2] S v Makwanyane 1995
[3] S v Makwanyane 1995
