Generally, argumentative essays focus on topics that are prone to attract controversy, academic discourse and partisanship. Common argumentative essay topics include issues such as euthanasia, capital punishment, abortions and animal testing. An argumentative essay should not be a unilateral rant. It should address counter-arguments and should be able refute them with evidence in support of its message.
The two accused in this matter were convicted in the Witwatersrand Local Division of the Supreme Court on four counts of murder, one count of attempted murder and one count of robbery with aggravating circumstances. They were sentenced to death on each of the counts of murder and to long terms of imprisonment on the other counts.
They appealed to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court against the convictions and sentences. The Appellate Division dismissed the appeals against the convictions and came to the conclusion that the circumstances of the murders were such that the accused should receive the heaviest sentence permissible according to law.
Section 1 a of the Criminal Procedure Act No. Counsel for the accused was invited by the Appellate Division to consider whether this provision was consistent with the Republic of South Africa Constitution,which had come into force subsequent to the conviction and sentence by the trial court. He argued that it was not, contending that it was in conflict with the provisions of sections 9 and 11 2 of the Constitution.
The Appellate Division dismissed the appeals against the sentences on the counts of attempted murder and robbery, but postponed the further hearing of the appeals against the death sentence until the constitutional issues are decided by this Court. Two issues were raised: Although there was no formal reference of these issues to this Court in terms of section 6 of the Constitution, that was implicit in the judgment of the Appellate Division, and was treated as such by the parties.
The trial was concluded before the Constitution came into force, and so the question of the constitutionality of the death sentence did not arise at the trial.
Because evidence which might possibly be relevant to that issue would not have been led, we asked counsel appearing before this Court to consider whether evidence, other than undisputed information placed before Outline for a capital punishment research paper in argument, would be relevant to the determination of the question referred to us by the Appellate Division.
Apart from the issue of public opinion, with which I will deal later in this judgment, counsel were not able to point to specific material that had not already been placed before us which might be relevant to the decision on the constitutional issues raised in this case.
I am satisfied that no good purpose would be served by referring the case back to the trial court for the hearing of further evidence and that we should deal with the matter on the basis of the information and arguments that have been presented to us. It would no doubt have been better if the framers of the Constitution had stated specifically, either that the death sentence is not a competent penalty, or that it is permissible in circumstances sanctioned by law.
This, however, was not done and it has been left to this Court to decide whether the penalty is consistent with the provisions of the Constitution. No executions have taken place in South Africa since Some of these convictions date back toand approximately half of the persons on death row were sentenced more than two years ago.
It does not deal specifically with the death penalty, but in section 11 2it prohibits "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. In S v Zuma and Two Others, 6 this Court dealt with the approach to be adopted in the interpretation of the fundamental rights enshrined in Chapter Three of the Constitution.
It gave its approval to an approach which, whilst paying due regard to the language that has been used, is "generous" and "purposive" and gives expression to the underlying values of the Constitution.
The meaning of a right or freedom guaranteed by the Charter was to be ascertained by an analysis of the purpose of such a guarantee; it was to be understood, in other words, in the light of the interests it was meant to protect.
In my view this analysis is to be undertaken, and the purpose of the right or freedom in question is to be sought by reference to the character and larger objects of the Charter itself, to the language chosen to articulate the specific right or freedom, to the historical origins of the concept enshrined, and where applicable, to the meaning and purpose of the other specific rights and freedoms with which it is associated within the text of the Charter.
The interpretation should be Bizos, who represented the South African government at the hearing of this matter, informed us that the government accepts that the death penalty is a cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment and that it should be declared unconstitutional.
The Attorney General of the Witwatersrand, whose office is independent of the government, took a different view, and contended that the death penalty is a necessary and acceptable form of punishment and that it is not cruel, inhuman or degrading within the meaning of section 11 2.
He argued that if the framers of the Constitution had wished to make the death penalty unconstitutional they would have said so, and that their failure to do so indicated an intention to leave the issue open to be dealt with by Parliament in the ordinary way.
It was for Parliament, and not the government, to decide whether or not the death penalty should be repealed, and Parliament had not taken such a decision. Legislative History The written argument of the South African government deals with the debate which took place in regard to the death penalty before the commencement of the constitutional negotiations.
The information that it placed before us was not disputed. It was argued that this background information forms part of the context within which the Constitution should be interpreted. Our Courts have held that it is permissible in interpreting a statute to have regard to the purpose and background of the legislation in question.
Certainly no less important than the oft repeated statement that the words and expressions used in a statute must be interpreted according to their ordinary meaning is the statement that they must be interpreted in the light of their context.A punishment is the imposition of an undesirable or unpleasant outcome upon a group or individual, meted out by an authority—in contexts ranging from child discipline to criminal law—as a response and deterrent to a particular action or behaviour that is deemed undesirable or unacceptable.
The reasoning may be to condition a child to avoid self . Essay, term paper research paper on Gun Control. Gun Control Gun control is an action of the government that is supposed to reduce crime. Delegation strategies for the NCLEX, Prioritization for the NCLEX, Infection Control for the NCLEX, FREE resources for the NCLEX, FREE NCLEX Quizzes for the NCLEX, FREE NCLEX exams for the NCLEX, Failed the NCLEX - Help is here.
Environment Research Paper Examples. Environmental science is an interdisciplinary academic field that integrates physical, biological and information sciences (including ecology, biology, physics, chemistry, zoology, mineralogy, oceanology, limnology, soil science, geology, atmospheric science, and geodesy) to the study of the environment, and the solution of environmental problems.
A punishment is the imposition of an undesirable or unpleasant outcome upon a group or individual, meted out by an authority—in contexts ranging from child discipline to criminal law—as a response and deterrent to a particular action or behaviour that is deemed undesirable or unacceptable.
The reasoning may be to condition a child to avoid self-endangerment, to impose social conformity (in.
This sample child abuse research paper is published for educational and informational purposes only. Free research papers, are not written by our writers, they are contributed by users, so we are not responsible for the content of this free sample paper.