Section 170A(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of 1977: Do Intermediaries Need to Be Sworn in or Not? S v QN 2012 1 SACR 380 (KZP)

Journal of Contemporary Roman-Dutch Law, Vol. 76, p. 285-292, 2013

8 Pages Posted: 6 Dec 2013

See all articles by Mildred Bekink

Mildred Bekink

University of South Africa (UNISA)

Date Written: May 6, 2013

Abstract

Realising that children suffer severe mental stress when giving evidence in the presence of an accused, the South African Law Commission in 1989 conducted an investigation into the giving of evidence by child witnesses in an open court and came to the conclusion that children were traumatized by the criminal procedure. In an attempt to remove the direct confrontation between the child and the accused, the Commission recommended that children be allowed to testify in a special room via an intermediary. This proposal gave rise to the introduction of the function of an intermediary with the insertion of section 170A(1) into the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977.

Keywords: evidence, child witnesses, intermediaries

Suggested Citation

Bekink, Mildred, Section 170A(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of 1977: Do Intermediaries Need to Be Sworn in or Not? S v QN 2012 1 SACR 380 (KZP) (May 6, 2013). Journal of Contemporary Roman-Dutch Law, Vol. 76, p. 285-292, 2013, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2364287 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2364287

Mildred Bekink (Contact Author)

University of South Africa (UNISA) ( email )

P.O. Box 392
UNISA
Pretoria, Gauteng 0003
South Africa

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
236
Abstract Views
1,418
Rank
237,343
PlumX Metrics