Papers by Helena Van Coller
The powers of religious bodies largely depend on whether they are entrusted with legal personalit... more The powers of religious bodies largely depend on whether they are entrusted with legal personality or not. If a church has been entrusted with legal personality, it has the capacity to acquire rights or incur liabilities; it can own property, enter into legal transactions or sue and be sued in its own name. The nature of the association, together with its constitution and objects, determine whether an association possesses legal personality or not. From a legal point of view, it is clear that the church is viewed a legal person, constituted on its own internal rules. The courts have however not been consistent in their application and views on recognizing and defining the legal personality of churches. It seems clear however that churches are seen by the law as associations with legal personality, which are the lawful owners of their assets, property and funds and that legal personality can also vest in the different constitutent congregations, circuits or synods.
Routledge eBooks, Jul 11, 2019
Tydskrif vir geesteswetenskappe, Mar 19, 2021
Freedom of expression: Blasphemy and the prohibition against religious hate speech Section 16 of ... more Freedom of expression: Blasphemy and the prohibition against religious hate speech Section 16 of the Constitution guarantees the right to freedom of expression. Our courts have highlighted the importance of the right, but also emphasised the fact that it is not without certain limitations. Section 16(2) therefore makes it clear that the right to freedom of expression does not extend to certain expressions. Sections 16(2)(a) and (b) are concerned with "propaganda for war" and "incitement of imminent violence" respectively. Section 16(2)(c) is directed at what is commonly referred to as hate speech, namely expression or speech that amounts to "advocacy of hatred" based on one or other of the listed grounds, namely race, ethnicity, gender or religion and which amounts to "incitement to cause harm". The right to freedom of expression also goes hand in hand with the right to freedom of religion, which includes the right to be able to express one's beliefs and convictions. Hence, every person and religious institution should be granted the right to freedom of expression in respect of religion. Of particular importance in relation to freedom of expression and the prohibition on hate speech is the right to religious dignity, which includes to not being victimised, ridiculed or slandered on the grounds of one's faith, religion, convictions or religious activities. No person may advocate hatred that is based on religion, and that constitutes incitement to violence or to cause physical harm. Within the context of the right to freedom of expression, this paper will first discuss the offence of blasphemy in South Africa, followed by a discussion of the prohibition against hate speech. The repealed censorship laws prohibited blasphemy in South Africa, although the latter remains a commonlaw offence. According to the South African common law, blasphemy used to be a criminal offence and consisted of the "unlawful and intentional publication of words or conduct whereby God is slandered". It has been pointed out that the law of blasphemy is anomalous in that it only protects the religious feelings of Christians, and not those of members of other religions. Other religious groups may suffer similar feelings of outrage caused by an attack on the Supreme Being that they worship. Currently the commonlaw crime of blasphemy still forms part of South African law and it has not formally been abolished by any legislator nor declared to be unconstitutional. Criminal law expert Burchell advocates the abolition of the crime and that cases of blasphemy should be regarded as cases of incitement to religious hatred, which would apply to all religions equally. In light of the right to freedom of religion, an equitable solution might be to extend the definition of blasphemy to include protection for all religions, not exclusively Christianity. Apart from section 16(2) of the Constitution that prohibits hate speech, section 10 of the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act (PEPUDA) 4 of 2000 also prohibits hate speech. It specifically states that no person may publish, propagate, advocate or communicate words based on one or more of the prohibited grounds (including religion), with the intention to be hurtful; be harmful or to incite harm, or promote or propagate hatred. The Supreme Court of Appeal recently found this section to be unconstitutional for extending the grounds for hate speech beyond what is required in terms of the Constitution. A revised Prevention and Combating of Hate Crimes and Hate Speech Bill (the Bill) has recently been tabled before Parliament as an improved version of its 2016 predecessor. The Bill is better aligned to the Constitution in relation to its prohibition of certain forms of speech, namely speech that is harmful or incites harm, and promotes or propagates hatred. The Bill criminalises hate speech but creates certain defences and includes a religious exemption clause. The new section 3(2)(d) states that the offence of hate speech does not apply in respect of anything done in good faith in the course while engaging in "the bona fide interpretation and proselytising or espousing of any religious tenet, belief, teaching, doctrine or writings". This
49 R v Sibeko, 43. 50 Section 2(1)(a) of the Animals Protection Act No. 71 of 1972. 51 Animals Pr... more 49 R v Sibeko, 43. 50 Section 2(1)(a) of the Animals Protection Act No. 71 of 1972. 51 Animals Protection Act, sec 2(1)(r). 52 Animals Protection Act, sec 8(1)(a). 53 Animals Protection Act, 8(1)(b)-(d).
Routledge eBooks, Jul 11, 2019
Ned Geref teologiese Tydskrif, Oct 1, 2011
The meaning of 'religious organisations': a comparative perspective A pluralistic religious socie... more The meaning of 'religious organisations': a comparative perspective A pluralistic religious society presupposes various definitions of 'religion' and 'religious organisations'. In order to attract constitutional protection in the form of the right to freedom of religion, organisations require an appropriate definition and application. In a legal context a functional and practical approach on the basis of a set of beliefs and characteristics is supported, rather that a formalistic, technical approach. Such a flexible approach is also in line with the Dutch approach in defining a 'kerkgenootschap' and ought to be followed to accommodate our multi-religious and multi-denominational society.
Tydskrif vir geesteswetenskappe, Mar 1, 2021
Routledge eBooks, Jul 11, 2019
Brill | Nijhoff eBooks, Aug 17, 2022
Litnet Akademies : 'n Joernaal vir die Geesteswetenskappe, Natuurwetenskappe, Regte en Godsdienswetenskappe, Dec 1, 2013
Die kwessie van homoseksuele predikante, gay-huwelike en gay-legitimasie is van die enkele komple... more Die kwessie van homoseksuele predikante, gay-huwelike en gay-legitimasie is van die enkele komplekse juridiese en morele vraagstukke wat die pluralistiese Suid-Afrikaanse samelewing konfronteer. Ten aansien van kerke en geloofsinstellings is die institusionele reg op godsdiensvryheid en die reg op vryheid van assosiasie twee belangrike gemeenskapsregte wat dikwels in konflik staan met die fundamentele regte van gelykheid, menswaardigheid en niediskriminasie. By 'n dispuut sal die regte teen mekaar opgeweeg moet word. Wat voorbeelde betref, sal die bespreking fokus op die huidige regsdebatte en howe se siening van so 'n konflik. Dit sal blyk dat die meeste hoofstroomkerke die siening huldig dat slegs die verbintenis tussen een man en een vrou as 'n huwelik beskou kan word, en dat homoseksuele gelegitimeerdes wat 'n selibate lewenstyl beoefen, wel tot die predikantsamp toegelaat kan word. Vanuit 'n juridiese perspektief en in die lig van die reg op godsdiensvryheid, en waar 'n kerk se beleid hierdie standpunt duidelik uiteensit, behoort die hof dit te respekteer. Kerke word egter nie onvoorwaardelik gevrywaar van die bepalings van die Wet op Bevordering van Gelykheid en Voorkoming van Onbillike Diskriminasie en selfs die Grondwet of arbeidswetgewing nie. Indien onsekerheid bestaan oor die kerk se beleid of wat van 'n bepaalde werknemer verwag word, kan die hof ingryp en die betrokke kerk se kerkorde en reels en regulasies interpreteer ten einde te bepaal of die kerk sy eie reels en prosedures nagekom het. Die voorbeelde van Lulani Vermeulen, Ecclesia de Lange en Abe Pieterse beklemtoon die komplekse saak van homoseksualiteit, nie net binne die Nederduitse Gereformeerde Kerk, die Metodistekerk en die Verenigende Gereformeerde Kerk nie, maar in kerke regoor die wereld en in amper elke denominasie. Kerke word aangemoedig om ernstig te besin oor die kwessie van homoseksuele predikante en gay-legitimasie. Hieroor sal kerke en belanghebbendes met mekaar in gesprek moet tree. Kerkleiers moet bemagtig word om sinvol om te gaan met kwessies van diversiteit en godsdienstige pluralisme. Gay clergy : a legal and moral dilemma South African society exhibits a growing multicultural character, which finds expression in a religious pluralism with much more diversity than in the past. It is becoming more and more important to recognise the need for religious diversity in a pluralistic society. Homosexuality, gay marriages and the legitimisation of theology students are only some of the very emotional legal and moral issues confronting the pluralistic South African society. With regard to churches and religious institutions, article 15 (freedom of religion), article 18 (freedom of association) and article 31 (the right to associate in religious communities) of the South African Constitution play a very important role in relation to the degree of interference by the state in the internal affairs of these institutions. Government interference can occur due to discriminatory practices by the organisation, but only in accordance with article 36 of the Constitution. The operation of articles 15, 18 and 31 of the Constitution should limit state interference in the internal affairs of religious institutions and allow interference only in very exceptional cases. When a dispute arises, it will become necessary to balance the different rights entrenched in the Bill of Rights appropriately and engage in a process of balancing competing rights. This balancing exercise often requires the balancing of two distinct sets of rights. On the one hand are the fundamental rights of equality, dignity and non-discrimination and on the other hand the so-called community or associative rights, including the right to freedom of association, the right to freedom of religion and the right to associate in cultural, religious and linguistic communities.
Uploads
Papers by Helena Van Coller