Research Articles (Mercantile and Labour Law)
Permanent URI for this collection
Browse
Browsing by Author "Kondo, Tinashe"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Constitutionalising socio-economic rights in SADC: An impact assessment on judicial enforcement in South Africa, Zimbabwe, Botswana, Lesotho and Zambia(Nelson R Mandela School of Law, 2020) Kondo, TinasheThis paper assesses the manner in which socio-economic rights have been incorporated into the constitutions of selected countries in the Southern African Development Community. This debate is particularly important because, in the last decade, there have been changes or attempted changes to constitutions in some member states of this subregional community. However, much of the comparative work on socio-economic rights in the region predates these changes and is therefore, largely, no longer relevant. Accordingly, the constitutions of South Africa, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Botswana and Lesotho are surveyed. It was found that the state of socio-economic rights in these countries could be divided into three categories: those that have constitutionalised socio-economic rights, those without socio-economic rights in their constitutions, and those that have socioeconomic rights as directive principles of state policy. To understand the implications of these categories, an investigation was undertaken into whether a specific category undermines the enforcement, and subsequently, the realisation of these rights.Item Socio-economic rights in Zimbabwe: Trends and emerging jurisprudence(Pretoria University Law Press, 2017) Kondo, TinasheIn a country such as Zimbabwe where many are deprived of opportunities and resources owing, in part, to injustices of the past, socio-economic rights are of the outmost importance. As a result, the new Constitution of Zimbabwe, adopted in 2013, expressly provides for socio-economic rights. While these are yet to be extensively tested, two cases discussed in the article illustrate the willingness of the courts to enforce these rights. In the Mushoriwa case, it is shown that state as well as non-state actors have to refrain from negatively interfering with constitutionally-protected and enforceable socio-economic rights. The Hopcik case shows that there is a positive obligation on the state, which may involve the allocation of resources, to ensure that socio-economic rights are realised. These two cases serve as a good platform from which the courts can continue to develop the jurisprudence on socio-economic rights in Zimbabwe. It is suggested that guidance in dealing with more complex socio-economic rights cases can also be obtained from South African jurisprudence, particularly from the Grootboom case.