Constitutional application

dc.contributor.authorPillay, Anashri
dc.date.accessioned2017-04-10T10:17:43Z
dc.date.available2017-04-10T10:17:43Z
dc.date.issued2005
dc.date.updated2016-01-05T09:55:46Z
dc.description.abstractIn Van Eeden v Director of Public Prosecutions, Cape of Good Hope 2005(2) SACR 22 (C) the court considered the relationship between plea agreements and the right to a fair trial, protected in s 35 of the Constitution. In this case, the applicant and a co-accused had been charged with contravening the Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act 1992 (at 23i-j). The Director of Public Prosecutions, Cape of Good Hope acknowledged the existence of a plea agreement but there was some dispute as to the terms of that agreement (at 25d-e). The applicant’s version, confirmed by the attorney who had entered into the agreement on his behalf, was that the prosecution had agreed not to prosecute him if his co-accused pled guilty to the charge (at 24a-b). The prosecution claimed that proceedings against the applicant were terminated because of insufficient evidence at the time (at 25h-i).
dc.identifier.apacitationPillay, A. (2005). Constitutional application. <i>South African Journal of Criminal Justice</i>, http://hdl.handle.net/11427/24173en_ZA
dc.identifier.chicagocitationPillay, Anashri "Constitutional application." <i>South African Journal of Criminal Justice</i> (2005) http://hdl.handle.net/11427/24173en_ZA
dc.identifier.citationPillay, A. (2005). Constitutional application: case review. South African Journal of Criminal Justice, 18(3), p-400.
dc.identifier.ris TY - Journal Article AU - Pillay, Anashri AB - In Van Eeden v Director of Public Prosecutions, Cape of Good Hope 2005(2) SACR 22 (C) the court considered the relationship between plea agreements and the right to a fair trial, protected in s 35 of the Constitution. In this case, the applicant and a co-accused had been charged with contravening the Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act 1992 (at 23i-j). The Director of Public Prosecutions, Cape of Good Hope acknowledged the existence of a plea agreement but there was some dispute as to the terms of that agreement (at 25d-e). The applicant’s version, confirmed by the attorney who had entered into the agreement on his behalf, was that the prosecution had agreed not to prosecute him if his co-accused pled guilty to the charge (at 24a-b). The prosecution claimed that proceedings against the applicant were terminated because of insufficient evidence at the time (at 25h-i). DA - 2005 DB - OpenUCT DP - University of Cape Town J1 - South African Journal of Criminal Justice LK - https://open.uct.ac.za PB - University of Cape Town PY - 2005 T1 - Constitutional application TI - Constitutional application UR - http://hdl.handle.net/11427/24173 ER - en_ZA
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11427/24173
dc.identifier.vancouvercitationPillay A. Constitutional application. South African Journal of Criminal Justice. 2005; http://hdl.handle.net/11427/24173.en_ZA
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisher.departmentDepartment of Public Lawen_ZA
dc.publisher.facultyFaculty of Lawen_ZA
dc.publisher.institutionUniversity of Cape Town
dc.sourceSouth African Journal of Criminal Justice
dc.source.urihttps://juta.co.za/law/products/3599-south-african-journal-of-criminal-justice/
dc.titleConstitutional application
dc.typeJournal Articleen_ZA
uct.type.filetypeText
uct.type.filetypeImage
uct.type.publicationResearchen_ZA
uct.type.resourceArticleen_ZA
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
article_law_2005_pillay_a.pdf
Size:
150.88 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.72 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Collections