A historical and comparative study of human rights violations in criminal investigations in Lesotho.

[摘要] English: The issue of human rights violations in criminal investigation emerges as one of themuch debated subjects amongst academics since the inception of the idea of thefundamental human rights all over the world. Human rights remain a center pillarand a pivot around which criminal justice system revolves.In Lesotho, for example, the question of human rights has been critical in the lightof the fact that, since independence on the 4th of October 1966, there was never areal and tangible instrument which guaranteed human rights. The 1966 Constitutionwhich contained entrenched Bill of Rights was suspended in 1970.From 1970 until 1993, Lesotho was governed undemocratically. There were noperiodic elections as prescribed by the 1966 Constitution. The 1970 interim authorityintroduced orders which administered the country. Around that time, besides interimorders, the country was governed through military dictates, 90 days detentionwithout trial and state of emergency laws and regulations.Citizens were arrested, searched and charged arbitrarily by the governments of theday. The study, firstly, commences with a thorough investigation of the violation ofthe fundamental human rights. It gives a historical background of Lesotho politicallandscape, legal system, Lesotho mounted police service evolution, and practicalhuman rights violations.The study, secondly, draws a comparative scenario between Lesotho, the Republicof South Africa, the United States of America and the United Kingdom as far ashuman rights violations are concerned.The question of police use of force, whether deadly or moderate, while conductingarrest, search or seizure, has been thoroughly investigated and discussed. Humanrights material, documents and instruments internationally or locally have beenidentified, analyzed and discussed.Based on the findings of the research, lessons and recommendations for Lesothohave been drawn. The study argues that generally speaking, there are no adequatecontrol mechanisms put in place to regulate police powers in Lesotho compared toother jurisdictions. It further argues that, some jurisdictions, such as the UnitedKingdom, the Republic of South Africa and the United States of America have someadvanced police intervention programmes aimed at improving and constantlychecking police work.The Republic of South Africa in particular, has moved away from the apartheid pasttendencies and legacy which saw the police use repressive means in dealing with thepublic unrest. For example, the principle of Parliamentary Sovereignty encouragedthem to abuse their power as illustrated in the decision of Sachs v Minister ofJustice' where the Judge had this to say: Arguments are sometimes advancedwhich do seem to me to ignore the plain principle that Parliament may make anyencroachment it chooses upon life, liberty and property of any individual subject toits sway, and that it is the function of the courts of law to enforce (Parliament'swill). However, this scenario changed with the introduction of the interimConstitution of 1993 which ushered in a democratic majority rule in 1994. Theintroduction of the 1993 interim Constitution brought with it a Constitutional Statefounded on the supremacy of the Constitution and the rule of law as opposed to along practiced Parliamentary rule.

[发布机构] University of the Free State