, Name: Ntwanano Duduzile Chabalala
Student number: 60960574
Assignment no: 2
Module: Media Law
Due date: 04 May 2022
Question 1
The previous position in relation to section 2 (1) of the law on the ban on intercept and
surveillance 127 of 1992 ("Impa"), which was lifted by Rica, was as follows:
"2 (1) No staff may: (A ) Consistent and without the knowledge or approval of the
dispatcher, communication that should or is on a telecommunications line on a
telecommunications line are or is intentionally transferred to a conversation or
communication through conversation or communication or intentionally monitored or
intentionally monitored . Communication via a surveillance device to collect confidential
information about the person, organism or organization. "However, there is Certain
exceptions in which the court can prove that certain communication is intercepted. This
includes the following: "(a) a certain post article or a certain communication that is to or
is to be transferred by telecommunications on a telecommunications line by phone or in
any other way ...;
(b) All post items to or by a person, a body or organization or all communication that
should or should be transferred on a telecommunications line, on or by a person, a
corporation or an organization, by telephone or otherwise. whether a
telecommunications line is used to carry out these conversations or to transfer this
communication or not ..
(c) All post items to or by a person, a corporation or organization or all communication
that should or should be transferred on a telecommunications line, direction or by a
person, a body or an organization by telephone or in any other way Or should be
transferred in any other way ...; either (c) Talks for or or communication with or from a
person, corporation or organization, regardless of whether a telecommunications line is
used to carry out these conversations or to transfer this communication or not ... " In
addition, it was argued in Lenco Holdings against Ekstein 1996 (2) SA 693 (s) that the
court in civil law proceedings had the discretion of excluding the evidence obtained by
criminal law or being received incorrectly in any other way. In view of the same facts,
although the behavior of XS in relation to section 8 of the IMP would have been
promoted to a crime, the court would still have a discretion with regard to the
admissibility of the adhesive tape recording. This legal discretion was developed in the
pre -constitutional age, but has a constitutional basis, since section 34 of the
constitution of the Republic of South Africa from 1996 ("Das Constitution") determines
that everyone has the right to a fair civil procedure. This principle in connection with the
This study source was downloaded by 100000829011123 from CourseHero.com on 03-05-2023 01:28:24 GMT -06:00
1
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller Excellentstudyresources001. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $3.00. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.