Search

In this forum contribution Huw Bennett and Peter Romijn compare how British and Dutch authorities have dealt with reports on atrocities committed systematically by their own troops in the armed conflicts of decolonisation in Kenya and Indonesia, respectively. This comparison demonstrates the differences that existed in the Dutch and British dealing with and manipulation of information, the organisation of disinformation and the management of scandals, owing to the particular nature of the political and colonial systems in both empires. Despite these differences, it is clear that both the British and the Dutch authorities successfully applied a ‘management of scandal’ in order to avoid that critical reports on atrocities would be investigated thoroughly and would cause political trouble. Against the background of ingrained colonial practices and mentalities, both the British and Dutch government took absolute priority in ‘restoring their authority’ in these territories. Thus, the responsible authorities allowed their troops much room for manoeuvre in engaging the enemy. If necessary, they offered those responsible for atrocities the benefit of the doubt, thus institutionalising an informal culture of impunity. In deze forumbijdrage vergelijken Huw Bennett en Peter Romijn de manier waarop Britse en Nederlandse autoriteiten omgingen met berichten over systematische wreedheden begaan door de eigen troepen tijdens de onafhankelijkheidsstrijd van respectievelijk Kenia en Indonesië. De vergelijking toont dat er verschillen waren in de sturing en manipulatie van informatie, de organisatie van desinformatie en de omgang met schandalen, als gevolg van de specifieke aard van de politieke verhoudingen en het koloniale bestel in beide landen. Ondanks deze verschillen blijkt dat zowel Britse en Nederlandse politici en bestuurders met succes ‘schandaalmanagement’ hebben toegepast om te voorkomen dat belastende feiten diepgaand onderzocht werden en dat ze politiek in de problemen kwamen. Tegen de achtergrond van ingesleten koloniale praktijken en mentaliteiten vonden de Britse en Nederlandse autoriteiten ‘gezagsherstel’ en ‘gezagshandhaving’ in deze gebieden prioritair. De verantwoordelijke leiders gaven de eigen troepen daarom de ruimte die zij opeisten om de vijand te bestrijden. Zo nodig gaven ze de verantwoordelijken voor wreedheden het voordeel van de twijfel, waardoor er een informele cultuur van straffeloosheid ontstond.

In the midst of concerns about serious offences committed by young people, the Child Justice Act is the first formal legislative step to introduce restorative justice in South Africa, and promotes reconciliation and problem solving as an approach to the criminal behaviour of youth. This article analyses the new place of restorative justice and ubuntu in the Act through an analysis of the Preamble, Objects and General Principles sections of the Act as well as the chapters on diversion and sentencing. It notes that there is a clear and consistent framework for restorative justice and ubuntu in the Act that accords with the Constitutional Court’s understanding of both concepts. In addition, the article also enquires if the inclusion of these concepts has created a criminal justice system for children that does not hold them properly accountable for their actions. The question as to whether or not the Act has created a "just say sorry" regime is answered in the negative by way of reference to the numerous checks and balances included in the Act by the legislature. In this context it is contended that the inclusion of ubuntu-related ideologies remains relevant to the development of indigenous and locally constructed images of Africanised forms of justice, but that the true test of how it is integrated into the criminal justice system lies in the manner in which criminal justice role-players engage with ubuntu and how its implementation is effected.

Many evolutionary biologists argue that human sexual behaviour can be studied in exactly the same way as that of other species. Many sociologists argue that social influences effectively obscure, and are more important than, a reductionist biological approach to human sexual behaviour. Here,we authors attempt to provide a broad introduction to human sexual behaviour from a biological standpoint and to indicate where the ambiguous areas are. We outline the evolutionary selective pressures that are likely to have influenced human behaviour and mate choice in the past and in the present; ecological features that influence such things as degree of parental care and polygamy; and the associated physiology of human sexuality. Then they end with a discussion of �abnormal� sexuality.