SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 número71Justice Denied? Prosecutors and presiding officers' reliance on evidence of previous sexual history in South African rape trialsThe omission of the opt-out clause – The revised (and improved?) Traditional Courts Bill 2017 índice de autoresíndice de assuntospesquisa de artigos
Home Pagelista alfabética de periódicos  

Serviços Personalizados



Links relacionados

  • Em processo de indexaçãoCitado por Google
  • Em processo de indexaçãoSimilares em Google


SA Crime Quarterly

versão On-line ISSN 2413-3108
versão impressa ISSN 1991-3877


MAPHOSA, Ropafadzo. Progressive or regressive rape case law? Tshabalala v S; Ntuli v S 2020 2 SACR 38 CC. SA crime q. [online]. 2022, n.71, pp.1-11. ISSN 2413-3108.

The Constitutional Court's decision in Tshabalala v S; Ntuli v S 2020 2 SACR 38 CC is undoubtedly a step in the right direction towards rape law reform in South Africa, however, this article challenges the court's decision to extend the application of the common law doctrine to common law rape. It is argued that the court could have highlighted the power dynamics at play during the commission of rape without denouncing instrumentality as a central element of the crime. This article further argues that the Constitutional Court, in developing common law rape, should have taken into account that rape is a conduct/instrumental crime under the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment 32 of2007. Instead, the judgment now has the effect of creating different elements for common law rape, in cases where there is more than one perpetrator.

        · texto em Inglês     · Inglês ( pdf )


Creative Commons License Todo o conteúdo deste periódico, exceto onde está identificado, está licenciado sob uma Licença Creative Commons