Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorKroeze, Irma J.
dc.date.accessioned2022-02-23T14:05:12Z
dc.date.available2022-02-23T14:05:12Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.citationKroeze, I.J. 2020. Once more uBuntu : a reply to Radebe and Phooko. Potchefstroomse elektroniese regsblad = Potchefstroom electronic law journal, 2019(22):1-22 [http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/1727- 3781/2020/v23i0a8048]en_US
dc.identifier.issn1727-3781
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10394/38515
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.17159/1727- 3781/2020/v23i0a8048
dc.description.abstractThis article is a critical engagement with the most recent contribution to the debate on the nature and content of ubuntu. The contribution (by Radebe and Phooko) attempts to provide the concept of ubuntu with substantive content in order for the concept to provide legal solutions for legal problems. This article shows how this attempt largely fails for three reasons. In the first place because some of the suggested rules are social/moral rules that cannot be enforced by law. In the second place because other rules are already contained in common law, legislation or case law. In the third place the remaining rules are arguably either unconstitutional or inappropriate in an open and democratic society. The conclusion is that the suggested rules are not appropriate in an open society.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherPER/PELJen_US
dc.subjectuBuntuen_US
dc.subjectConstitutionen_US
dc.subjectLegal philosophyen_US
dc.titleOnce more uBuntu : a reply to Radebe and Phookoen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record