![cover image](https://wikiwandv2-19431.kxcdn.com/_next/image?url=https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7a/Constitutional_court_of_South_Africa.jpeg/640px-Constitutional_court_of_South_Africa.jpeg&w=640&q=50)
Nel v Le Roux
South African legal case / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Nel v Le Roux NO and Others is a 1996 decision of the Constitutional Court of South Africa in the area of criminal procedure. The Constitutional Court dismissed a constitutional challenge to section 205 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977, which allowed judicial officers to compel witnesses to provide evidence in pre-trial examinations. The court held unanimously that the summary imprisonment of recalcitrant witnesses in section 205 examinations was consistent with the Interim Constitution. In particular, the court found that the relevant sentencing procedure was neither criminal nor administrative in nature, so it was governed neither by the right to a fair trial nor by the right to just administrative action. The judgment was written by Justice Laurie Ackermann on behalf of a unanimous court.
Nel v Le Roux | |
---|---|
![]() | |
Court | Constitutional Court of South Africa |
Full case name | Nel v Le Roux NO and Others |
Decided | 4 April 1996 (1996-04-04) |
Docket nos. | CCT 30/95 |
Citations | [1996] ZACC 6; 1996 (4) BCLR 592; 1996 (3) SA 562 |
Case history | |
Prior actions | Referral from the Supreme Court of South Africa, Witwatersrand Local Division |
Court membership | |
Judges sitting | Chaskalson P, Mahomed DP, Ackermann, Didcott, Kriegler, Langa, Madala, Mokgoro, O'Regan and Sachs JJ |
Case opinions | |
The provisions of section 205 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 are not inconsistent with the Interim Constitution. | |
Decision by | Ackermann J (unanimous) |