Abstract

This article reviews the abolition of the defence of reasonable chastisement by the South African Constitutional Court on the grounds that it infringes the Constitution. After detailing the history of the abolition of corporal punishment in a democracy with the Constitution as supreme law, the article dissects the reasoning of the Constitutional Court. It argues that judgment in Freedom of Religion South Africa v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development (hereafter FORSA), whilst overall positive in its result, is probably a low water mark in the development of children’s rights jurisprudence in South Africa. There are a number of inadequacies and strangely deferential statements in the FORSA decision. Whilst inescapably coming to the constitutionally correct decision, the reluctance of the Court to reach this point, and its desire to accommodate the religious and cultural beliefs of the appellants, is evident. The way forward has, as a result, been left rather obscure.

中文翻译：

---

横扫和倒戈：废除南非的合理追逐防御

摘要

本文以南非宪法法院以违反宪法为由，取消对合理追究的辩护。在详细阐述了以《宪法》为最高法律的民主制废除体罚的历史之后，本文剖析了宪法法院的理由。它认为，南非的宗教自由诉司法和宪法发展部长（以下简称FORSA）一案的判决虽然总体上是积极的，但在南非儿童权利法学发展中可能是一个低水准。FORSA中存在许多不足之处和奇怪的贬损性陈述决定。尽管不可避免地要做出符合宪法的正确决定，但法院显然不愿达到这一点，并且它渴望容纳上诉人的宗教和文化信仰。结果，前进的道路变得晦涩难懂。