Search

This article investigates the challenges of the application of international law in a domestic setting as depicted in the ongoing trial of Thomas Kwoyelo. Kwoyelo, a former child soldier and commander in the Lord's Resistance Army, is being prosecuted for the commission inter alia of murder, kidnapping with intent to murder, and pillaging, all as war crimes and crimes against humanity under International Humanitarian Law, Customary International Law and the Penal Code Act of Uganda. He is currently standing trial at the International Crimes Division of the High Court of Uganda. This trial is a unique test for the Ugandan judiciary, as it is faced with its first prosecution of an individual charged with crimes under international law. In a bid to apply international law domestically the Court has faced several challenges which have disabled the progress of the trial on many levels, arguably at the expense of the accused and the victims at large. The article primarily seeks to analyse the capability of the court to prosecute Kwoyelo for the commission of international crimes as well as to examine the challenges faced by the Court. The history of the conflict will be examined. This will be followed by an overview of the judicial hurdles faced by the Ugandan State in eventually charging Kwoyelo. The article will then analyse the present challenges faced by the Court. Finally, several recommendations are offered.

The constitutional right to privacy is enshrined in section 14 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. It is premised on the notion that all persons should be protected from intrusions on their privacy by any person or institution. The Constitutional Court has also, on numerous occasions, held that the right to privacy is bolstered by its connection with the right to human dignity. It is undeniable that every person's right to privacy should be protected. However, a person's right to privacy is violated when police officials conduct warrantless search and seizure operations. Generally section 22 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides for warrantless search and seizure operations when a police official has a reasonable suspicion that a search warrant will be issued to him and that a delay in obtaining such a warrant would defeat the object of the search. Warrantless searches are important for the prevention of crime, but recent case law has suggested that there has been a progressive shift towards protecting the right to privacy of the individual subjected to warrantless searches, since there are a number of laws besides section 22 that regulate warrantless searches and which have been declared to be constitutionally invalid. This article seeks to demonstrate that the current regulatory framework for warrantless searches should be reviewed in order to protect the legitimacy of the police as well as the dignity and privacy of the citizens of South Africa.

The violent nature of some crimes and the high crime rate in South Africa reflect the fact that some offenders constitute a real threat to the security of communities. It is understandable, therefore, that the state seeks to protect its citizens through preventive measures. Although South Africa has certain legal provisions on its statutory books, it seems that the declaration of persons as dangerous criminals is under-utilised. South African legislation dealing with the declaration of dangerous criminals can be improved by borrowing some traits of the Canadian legislation. Such features include the restriction of courts' discretion and the provision of concrete and more detailed guidelines on the nature of the offences for which the provision can be applied. The courts could also take into account the type of criminal history of the offender which would merit the declaration of a dangerous criminal. It is also important that the extent of the violence in an offence should be thoroughly defined in court. Courts need to balance their wide discretion on the matter with the provisions in the Act in order to protect the community against dangerous criminals.