Convention on Prevention & Punishment of Crimes Against Internationally Protected Persons & Against Taking of Hostages

Share this page:

Meeting Summary

A summary of this committee meeting is not yet available.

Meeting report

SELECT COMMITTEE SECURITY AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS

SECURITY AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS SELECT COMMITTEE
25 June 2003
CONVENTION ON PREVENTION AND PUNISHMENT OF CRIMES AGAINST INTERNATIONALLY PROTECTED PERSONS AND INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION AGAINST TAKING OF HOSTAGES

Chairperson : Mr M L Mokoena (ANC)

Documents handed out

Accession to Counter-Terrorism Conventions Powerpoint Presentation

SUMMARY
SAPS Chief Manager, Legal Component Detective Services presented the Accession to Counter-Terrorism Conventions and discussed the implications in South Africa should it be decided to accede to the Convention. He was of the opinion that accession should occur especially in light of the current proposed Anti-Terrorism Bill. Issues also discussed included the concept of an 'internationally protected person.'

MINUTES
Dr Jacobs, SAPS Chief Manager, Legal Component Detective Services presented the Accession to Counter-Terrorism Conventions. Please refer to attached document. The presentation was in line with the fact that Parliament was busy with the proposed Anti-Terrorism Bill. A terrorist act is defined as a 'Convention offence' and includes murder, kidnapping, attack of an international person. He stated that it was important that the punishment fit the crime.

Certain obligations arose from the various conventions that had taken place in respect of the issue of hostage-taking - an issue that required consideration and clarification was that of jurisdiction in instances of hostage-taking. The way the position was in South Africa at present, jurisdiction remained a problem. Hostage-taking within the borders of South Africa was already a punishable offence, however, one was unable to prosecute a person who had taken a South African citizen hostage in another country. In a totally domestic situation where the hostage took place within South African borders and involving South African citizens, the Convention would not apply.

Discussion
Mr T Ralane (ANC) posed the question that where a terrorist had been given a life sentence would the Department of Correctional Services then be obliged to rehabilitate them in the same manner as any other criminal in terms of correctional services procedures?

Dr Jacobs said the Convention stated that a person who was arrested for such an offence must be treated fairly. There must also be compliance with the Constitution in respect of the rights of an arrested person. Dr Jacobs believed that it was the normal practice of Correctional Services to rehabilitate offenders.

The Chair then asked how many countries had signed the Conventions which had already been presented to the Committee previously.

Dr Jacobs said that all in all there were twelve UN International Conventions relating to this subject, including various Protocols and African Union Conventions. Where South Africa acceded to the current Convention there were only three more Conventions left for consideration and South Africa would then be in line with its international obligations.

Mr Mkhaliphi, stated that he may be out of line, but wished to understand the clout and power of these instruments where there were clearly some States that threatened international peace and security.

Dr Jacobs said that South Africa had expressed support to assist in combating international terrorism and had taken the required steps in terms of the UN Security Council Resolutions and that which was determined in terms of various conventions. As to the question of how certain States behave, Dr Jacobs stated that South Africa acted in accordance with UN requirements and that there were various forums wherein South Africa was able to express itself on the behaviour of other States. What South Africa was doing was what was expected of the country in terms of international law and its obligations in accordance therewith. South Africa, Dr Jacobs believed, lived out its obligations responsibly.

The Chair enquired about the meaning and definition of 'internationally protected person'.

Dr Jacobs replied that an 'internationally protected person' included a Head of State or a Minister of Foreign Affairs or any other representative of the State in an official (diplomatic) capacity when abroad. This category of persons was governed by the Diplomatic Immunities Act and is in line with the Vienna Convention in respect of the issue of immunity. The definition also included instances where a government may confer diplomatic status on an organisation.

Mr J Horne (NNP) stated that when persons go abroad as a delegation and as invited guests of a particular country, such persons are treaty diplomatically and enjoy such protection. However, when the same persons travel abroad in a private capacity, they do not enjoy such protection.

Various members indicated their approval that the Convention to passed on for accession and the Chair accordingly stated that the reports in respect of the Convention would be signed off - 'now'.

The meeting was adjourned.

Audio

No related

Documents

No related documents

Present

  • We don't have attendance info for this committee meeting

Download as PDF

You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.

See detailed instructions for your browser here.

Share this page: