S v M
| Iri |
legal case (en)  |
|---|---|
S v M shine yanke shawara ta Kotun Tsarin Mulki na Afirka ta Kudu tare da shigo da yara da hukuncin kisa. Kotun ta rike baki daya cewa za a dauki bukatun yaran a duk lokacin da ake sanya mai kulawa da yaro na farko. Wannan wajibin ya taso daga sashi na 28 (2) na Kundin Tsarin Mulki, wanda ya sake shiga da mafi kyawun bukatun yaro, karanta tare da sashe na 28 (1) (b) (b) (b) na 'yancin yara, da madadin da ya dace.
Azaro Azaro An rubuta addinin Kotun da aka yi masaukin kotu a gaban Aljanna ya amince da fallasa sashe na 28. Mafi yawan sun yi amfani da wannan uwa, a maimakon ta kulla yarjejeniya da ta rashin kulawa. Duk da haka, wani 'yan tsiraru memba uku, sun wakilci a cikin' yan tsiraru Thorie Madala, sun sha bamban da mafi rinjaye a cikin kimar lamarin kuma ba za su rage hukuncin mahaifiyarsa ba.[1]
Baya
[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]A shekara ta 2002, an yanke masa hukunci na 38 na zamba da kirga hudu na sata a cikin kotunan yanki a Wynberg, Cape Town. Kodayake an zaci ta ya zama dan takarar da ya dace don kulawa ta gaba, an yanke mata hukuncin shekaru hudun kai tsaye. A yayin roko, kotun Babban Kotun Cape ya gano cewa an yanke hukunci a kan subbaci da kuma babbar kotun da ta yanke hukunci a karkashin sashe na 1977 (I) na Afrika na Afirka ta Kudu, amma a Kotun Kundin Afirka ta Kudu ta amince da yin rijistar don neman afuwa.
A cikin kwatancen ta, kotuna sun tambayi jam'iyyun su mai da hankali kan kunkuntar guda daya na shari'ar M, gaskiyar cewa ita ce kawai mai kulawa da yara uku. Musamman, tambayar doka da za a yanke shawarar an sa ta bayyana cromatply:[2]
Wadanne ayyuka ne na kotun da ke mulkin a cikin hasken sashi na 28 (2) na Kundin Tsarin Mulki da duk wani abu da aka yanke masa hukunci shine babban mai hankali na yara?
Sashe na 28 (2), ɗayan tanadin biyan kuɗin haƙƙin haƙƙin da ke tattare da haƙƙin yara, yana samar da cewa, "mafi kyawun bukatun yara suna da mahimmanci mahimmancin yaro."
Kotun kundin tsarin mulki a ranar 22 ga Fabrairu 2007 kuma ta ba da hukunci a ranar 26 ga Satumbar 2007. Cibiyar Ann Scelton, wacce aka wakilta ta Ann Scelton.
Hukunci babba
[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]Mai shari'a Albie Sachs, wanda ya rubuta a madadin rinjayen kotun, an samu a cikin yardar M; Hukuncin nasa ya samu halartar mataimakin babban mai shari'a Dikgang Moseneke da alkalai Yvonne Mokgoro, Sandile Ngcobo, Kate O'Regan, Thembile Skweyiya, da Johann van der Westhuizen.
Hukuncin Sachs ya buɗe tare da bayyani mai tsawo na sashe na 28 na yancin yara na tsarin mulki musamman ma ƙa'idar fifikon mafi kyawun muradun yaron. Sachs ya yarda cewa an soki ƙa'idar mahimmanci don samar da mizani mara ƙayyadaddun ƙayyadaddun ƙayyadaddun ƙayyadaddun ƙayyadaddun ƙayyadaddun ƙa'ida, amma ya yi iƙirarin cewa "daidai ne yanayin mahallin da sassaucin ra'ayi na sashe na 28 wanda ya zama tushen ƙarfinsa". Duk da haka, ya zama dole a "kafa tsarin aiki da ya dace don ka'idar mahimmanci", dangane da abin da tsarin mahimmanci zai iya daidaitawa da sauran haƙƙin tsarin mulki, kodayake irin wannan "tuƙar" za a yi amfani da shi a sassauƙa da kuma bisa ga kowane hali.[3]
A game da hukuncin laifuka da aka yanke wa masu kulawa na farko, Sachs ya gano cewa sashe na 28 (2), ƙa'idar mahimmanci, dole ne a karanta shi tare da sashe na 28 (1), wanda ke ba da tabbacin yancin kowane yaro "don kula da iyali ko kulawar iyaye, ko kuma samun kulawar da ta dace lokacin da aka cire shi daga yanayin iyali". Wannan haƙƙin yana da hannu a duk lokacin da aka ɗaure babban mai kula da yaro, kuma kundin tsarin mulki ya ɗaure kotun da ke yanke hukunci don daidaita ’yancin ɗan yaro da sauran muradun al’umma da ake aiwatar da hukuncin aikata laifuka – musamman, aikin gwamnati na hukunta aikata laifuka. Per Sachs, ƙa'idar mahimmanci ba ta nuna cewa sha'awar yaron ta mamaye duk sauran abubuwan ba, amma dole ne a yi la'akari da bukatun yaron tare da sauran:
...ba hukuncin da aka yanke wa mai kula da yara ba ne da kansa ke barazanar keta muradun yaran. Aiwatar da hukuncin ne ba tare da kula da yadda ya kamata ba wajen kula da bukatun yara na musamman da ke barazanar yin hakan. Manufar jaddada aikin kotun da ke yanke hukuncin amincewa da muradun yaran, don haka, ba shine a bar iyayen da suka yi kuskure ba tare da dalili ba don guje wa hukuncin da ya dace. Maimakon haka, shi ne a kāre ’ya’yan da ba su da laifi gwargwadon iyawa a cikin yanayi daga lahani da za a iya guje wa.[4]
A cikin wannan tsarin, kotunan masu yanke hukunci ya kamata su ci gaba da jagorantar S v Zinn, wanda ya kasance bayanin da aka ba da izini game da abubuwan da za a yi la'akari da su a cikin yanke hukunci: abin da ake kira "Zinn triad" yana jawo hankali ga yanayin laifin, yanayin mai laifin, da kuma bukatun al'umma. Ko da yake Sachs ya yi adawa da bayyana "formula", ya ba da shawarar "jagororin" don haɗa sashe na 28 a cikin aikace-aikacen Zinn triad:
Ya kamata kotun da ke yanke hukunci ta binciki ko wanda aka yankewa hukuncin shine mai kula da matakin farko a duk lokacin da alamun hakan zai iya faruwa... Haka nan kotun ta tabbatar da tasirin yaran da aka yankewa hukuncin daurin rai da rai idan ana tunanin irin wannan hukuncin.
Idan a tsarin Zinn triad hukuncin da ya dace ya kasance a bayyane a fili kuma wanda aka yanke masa hukunci ne mai kulawa na farko, dole ne kotu ta yi amfani da tunaninta kan ko ya zama dole ta dauki matakin tabbatar da cewa za a kula da yaran yadda ya kamata yayin da mai kulawa ke tsare.
Idan hukuncin da ya dace ya kasance a fili ba na tsarewa ba, dole ne kotu ta yanke hukuncin da ya dace, tare da la'akari da bukatun yaran.
A ƙarshe, idan akwai kewayon hukunce-hukuncen da suka dace game da tsarin Zinn, to dole ne kotu ta yi amfani da ƙa'idar mahimmanci game da muradun yaro a matsayin jagora mai mahimmanci wajen yanke hukuncin yanke hukunci.
A cikin shari'ar da ake yi yanzu, mafi rinjaye sun yi imanin cewa Alkalin yankin da ya yanke wa M hukunci bai ba da "isasshen kulawa da kulawa ba" ga tasirin da hukuncin zai yi a kan 'ya'yan M. Don haka kotun ta amince da daukaka karar da M ta yi kan hukuncin da ta yanke tare da ajiye shi a gefe. A maimakon haka, kotun ta yanke mata hukuncin daurin shekaru hudu a gidan yari, kamar yadda kotun yankin ta yi, amma sabanin kotun yankin, ta dakatar da hukuncin na tsawon shekaru hudu. Bayan da aka yi la'akari da wani lokaci na cancantar kulawar gyaran fuska a matsayin madadin daurin kai tsaye, kotun ta kuma sanya M karkashin kulawar gyaran fuska na tsawon shekaru uku, don hada da hidimar al'umma da shawarwari akai-akai; An kuma umarce ta da ta biya mutanen da ta damfara.
Manazarta
[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]- ↑ Lauwereys, Heleen (2 July 2020). "Sentencing primary caregivers in South Africa: the role of the child's best interests". South African Journal on Human Rights. 36 (2–3): 154–177. doi:10.1080/02587203.2020.1865113. ISSN 0258-7203.
- ↑ Life sentences". The Guardian. 30 June 2009. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 6 March 2024.
- ↑ Skelton, Ann (2008). "Severing the umbilical cord: a subtle jurisprudential shift regarding children and their primary caregivers". Constitutional Court Review. 1 (1): 351–368. doi:10.2989/CCR/2008.0013. ISSN 2073-6215.
- ↑ Skelton, Ann (2019). "Too much of a good thing? Best interests of the child in South African jurisprudence". De Jure. 52. doi:10.17159/2225-7160/2019/v52a32. hdl:2263/75534.