Back to results

Department of Public Law

About the constitutionality of mandatory minimum sentences

Abstract

dc:description.abstract

As difficult as the task of reaching a reliable verdict may be, the second half of a criminal court's procedure, that of imposing sentences on those who have been found guilty or who have themselves admitted their guilt raises even more fundamental questions. What are we trying to do, what is the object of this exercise? Traditionally there have been four approaches to the sentencing of an offender which correspond to the four "objects" or "purposes" of sentencing, namely retribution, rehabilitation, deterrence or incapacitation, i.e. the offender should be punished for the crime; the offender should be punished to be given the opportunity to return "onto the right track"; the offender (individual deterrence) or others (general deterrence) should be deterred from committing similar crimes in the future; and, finally, the offender should be incapacitated, i.e. be prevented from repeating crimes.

Degree

thesis:*
Grantor
Department of Public Law
Year dc:date.issued
1995

Author and committee

dc:creator, dc:contributor.*
Author dc:creator
  • Oppert, Anna
Advisor dc:contributor.advisor
  • van Zyl Smit, Dirk

Subjects

dc:subject × 1

Identifiers

dc:identifier.*
Handle dc:identifier.uri
http://hdl.handle.net/11427/38741
OAI identifier oai:identifier
oai:open.uct.ac.za:11427/38741

Chain of custody

source
Harvested from
University of Cape Town
Base URL
open.uct.ac.za/oai/request
Last updated
2026-07-22
Source record
OAI-PMH GetRecord
related terms
citation

Oppert, Anna. About the constitutionality of mandatory minimum sentences. Department of Public Law, 1995. http://hdl.handle.net/11427/38741