CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA Case CCT ... - saflii

ACKERMANN AND GOLDSTONE JJ39(2). In the ordinary course a court on appeal would, where the trial court has somisdirected itself, make the order which that court ought to have made. In the presentcase, for the reasons that follow, this can be done without pre-empting decisions of theHigh Court or the SCA as to whether the circumstances of the present case are such tocall for the law of delict to be developed, and if so, how this should be done. To thatend we proceed to consider the issues relevant to legal liability in the context of theevidence given at the trial and the provisions of the Constitution.Should Absolution From the Instance Have Been Granted in the Circumstances of thePresent Case?[61] Section 215 of the IC provides that:“The powers and functions of the Service shall be -(a) the prevention of crime;(b) the investigation of any offence or alleged offence;(c) the maintenance of law and order; and(d) (the preservation of the internal security of the Republic.” 6363(b)The provisions of the Constitution are more explicit. Section 7(2) provides that:“The state must respect, protect, promote and fulfil the rights in the Bill of Rights.”Section 41(1)(b) further provides that:“All spheres of government and all organs of state within each sphere must:. . .secure the well-being of the people of the Republic;”Chapter 11 makes provision for Security Services. Section 198(a) provides that:“. . . National security must reflect the resolve of South Africans, as individuals andas a nation, . . .to be free from fear. . .”And, section 205(3) reads as follows:“The objects of the police service are to prevent, combat and investigate crime, tomaintain public order, to protect and secure the inhabitants of the Republic and theirproperty, and to uphold and enforce the law.”37