1
1|Page
CMY1502 MEMOS 2019-2015
MAY/JUNE & 0CTO/NOV 2020 EXAM
PREPARATION
EXAMINATION PACK
VICTIMOLOGY
CMY 1502
PAST PAPER SOLUTIONS
, TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
OVIEW OF THE STUDY ............................................................................................................................. 3 -62
CYM 1502: OCTOBER/ NOVEMBERV 2018 ............................................................................................. 63-65
CMY 1502: MAY/JUNE 2018................................................................................................................... 66-68
CMY 1502: OCTOBER/NOVEMBER 2017 ................................................................................................ 69-71
Oview of the study
• Following the 1994 elections, the attention of the South African public, government,
media and business alike shifted from political violence to crime (Lochrenberg The
Nedcor Project, 1996; Shaw 1995). Calls were issued – some of them more audible
than the others – for the Government of National Unity to publicly recognise the
’crime problem’ as serious and to ’do something about it’. As a result the National
Crime Prevention Strategy (NCPS) was launched in 1996. The then Acting President,
Thabo Mbeki (1996), reported that the NCPS was introduced ‘‘as part of
government’s endeavour to eradicate the unacceptable levels of crime in our
country’’. As emphasised by Van Aswegen (2000:141), the NCPS is a vital document
in the history of South Africa because it is the first that attempts to: ‘‘establish a
comprehensive policy framework which addresses all policy areas which impact on
crime and to develop a common vision around crime prevention’’ and pioneer an
important paradigm shift in crime prevention.
• The NCPS articulates a new direction in which crime is to be governed - how crime is
to be understood and managed. Since it outlines principles and structures for
implementation in a somewhat basic fashion, it is best regarded as a strategic policy
rather than an operational programme. The process was managed by an
interdepartmental committee consisting of the Ministries of Correctional Services,
• Defence, Intelligence, Justice, Safety and Security and Welfare. Other national
government departments, civil society, private enterprises and domestic and
international experts also contributed to formulating the strategy as consultants,
workshop participants and through oral and written submissions. The final text,
approved by Cabinet, exactly one year later (May 1996), identifies crime prevention
as a national priority.
• Key concepts
• Crime victim ‘‘is a person who has been physically, financially injured or had property
taken or damaged by someone committing a crime’’ (Dussich 2006:118).
,• Victimology is an academic and scientific discipline which focuses on studying data
describing the cause-effect relationship of victimisation (Dussich 2006:118). Dussich
(2006:118) further explains that it includes events leading to victimisation; the victim’s
experience; the impact of victimisation on the victim; and measures used by the society
to respond to the act of victimisation. ‘‘Therefore, [victimology] includes the study of
the precursors, vulnerabilities, events, impacts, recoveries, and responses by people,
organisations and cultures related to victimisations’’ (Dussich 2006:118).
• Victimisation is defined by Dussich (2006:118) as an occurrence whereby an individual,
community or organisation is damaged or injured in a significant manner.
, • Individuals on whom the act of victimisation had an impact suffer violation of human
rights as well as noteworthy disturbance of their safety (Dussich 2006:118).
• A brief historical background
• Victimology was founded in the 1940s by four men: Beniamin Mendelsohn, Boulder
Hans Von Hentig, Stephen Schafer and Fredric Wertham (Rock 2007:41).
• Dussich (2006:116) explains that the idea of initiating a science to study victims of crime
as well as the word victimology originates from the writings of Beniamin
• Mendelson (1937; 1940). Mendelsohn provided a victimology vision and a map which
many victimologists followed and continue to follow today. As such, Mendelsohn is
referred to as the father of victimology (Dussich 2006:116).
• Definition of the concept ‘‘victim’’
• There are three paradigms of victimology under which the concept ‘‘victim’’ may be
defined namely
• Conservative or positivist victimology may also be referred to as the right realist,
conventional or administrative paradigm (Snyman 2005:8). As explained by Snyman
(2005:8) this approach of victimology is primarily aligned with the political field. Snyman
(2005:8) adds that supporters of positivist victimology advocate for a stringent
retributive criminal justice system with strict and clear definitions of who the victim of
crime is and who the perpetrator is. Based on this paradigm, a victim is ‘‘the person who
personally suffers harm, loss or injury inflicted by another person’’ (Snyman 2005:8–9).
Those who believe in this paradigm are of the opinion that the blame for victimisation
should be placed solely on the offender since the victim cannot be blamed (Snyman
2005:8–9).
• The Radical victimology paradigm known as left realism, radical left realism or
liberalism is also centred around the political spectrum and ‘‘supports a reform of the
retributive aspects of the criminal justice system’’ (Snyman 2005:9). Radical
• victimologists are of the opinion that there is a flow of roles between the victim and the
offender, as a result the definition of an offender is broad and also includes crimes
committed by the powerful (Snyman 2005:9). According to this paradigm, victimisation
is then viewed as emanating from underlying forces between the offender and the
victim and thus the victim is not completely innocent (Snyman
PRIM048 www.tutorialscampus.co.za +27 (71) 224 5255
1|Page
CMY1502 MEMOS 2019-2015
MAY/JUNE & 0CTO/NOV 2020 EXAM
PREPARATION
EXAMINATION PACK
VICTIMOLOGY
CMY 1502
PAST PAPER SOLUTIONS
, TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
OVIEW OF THE STUDY ............................................................................................................................. 3 -62
CYM 1502: OCTOBER/ NOVEMBERV 2018 ............................................................................................. 63-65
CMY 1502: MAY/JUNE 2018................................................................................................................... 66-68
CMY 1502: OCTOBER/NOVEMBER 2017 ................................................................................................ 69-71
Oview of the study
• Following the 1994 elections, the attention of the South African public, government,
media and business alike shifted from political violence to crime (Lochrenberg The
Nedcor Project, 1996; Shaw 1995). Calls were issued – some of them more audible
than the others – for the Government of National Unity to publicly recognise the
’crime problem’ as serious and to ’do something about it’. As a result the National
Crime Prevention Strategy (NCPS) was launched in 1996. The then Acting President,
Thabo Mbeki (1996), reported that the NCPS was introduced ‘‘as part of
government’s endeavour to eradicate the unacceptable levels of crime in our
country’’. As emphasised by Van Aswegen (2000:141), the NCPS is a vital document
in the history of South Africa because it is the first that attempts to: ‘‘establish a
comprehensive policy framework which addresses all policy areas which impact on
crime and to develop a common vision around crime prevention’’ and pioneer an
important paradigm shift in crime prevention.
• The NCPS articulates a new direction in which crime is to be governed - how crime is
to be understood and managed. Since it outlines principles and structures for
implementation in a somewhat basic fashion, it is best regarded as a strategic policy
rather than an operational programme. The process was managed by an
interdepartmental committee consisting of the Ministries of Correctional Services,
• Defence, Intelligence, Justice, Safety and Security and Welfare. Other national
government departments, civil society, private enterprises and domestic and
international experts also contributed to formulating the strategy as consultants,
workshop participants and through oral and written submissions. The final text,
approved by Cabinet, exactly one year later (May 1996), identifies crime prevention
as a national priority.
• Key concepts
• Crime victim ‘‘is a person who has been physically, financially injured or had property
taken or damaged by someone committing a crime’’ (Dussich 2006:118).
,• Victimology is an academic and scientific discipline which focuses on studying data
describing the cause-effect relationship of victimisation (Dussich 2006:118). Dussich
(2006:118) further explains that it includes events leading to victimisation; the victim’s
experience; the impact of victimisation on the victim; and measures used by the society
to respond to the act of victimisation. ‘‘Therefore, [victimology] includes the study of
the precursors, vulnerabilities, events, impacts, recoveries, and responses by people,
organisations and cultures related to victimisations’’ (Dussich 2006:118).
• Victimisation is defined by Dussich (2006:118) as an occurrence whereby an individual,
community or organisation is damaged or injured in a significant manner.
, • Individuals on whom the act of victimisation had an impact suffer violation of human
rights as well as noteworthy disturbance of their safety (Dussich 2006:118).
• A brief historical background
• Victimology was founded in the 1940s by four men: Beniamin Mendelsohn, Boulder
Hans Von Hentig, Stephen Schafer and Fredric Wertham (Rock 2007:41).
• Dussich (2006:116) explains that the idea of initiating a science to study victims of crime
as well as the word victimology originates from the writings of Beniamin
• Mendelson (1937; 1940). Mendelsohn provided a victimology vision and a map which
many victimologists followed and continue to follow today. As such, Mendelsohn is
referred to as the father of victimology (Dussich 2006:116).
• Definition of the concept ‘‘victim’’
• There are three paradigms of victimology under which the concept ‘‘victim’’ may be
defined namely
• Conservative or positivist victimology may also be referred to as the right realist,
conventional or administrative paradigm (Snyman 2005:8). As explained by Snyman
(2005:8) this approach of victimology is primarily aligned with the political field. Snyman
(2005:8) adds that supporters of positivist victimology advocate for a stringent
retributive criminal justice system with strict and clear definitions of who the victim of
crime is and who the perpetrator is. Based on this paradigm, a victim is ‘‘the person who
personally suffers harm, loss or injury inflicted by another person’’ (Snyman 2005:8–9).
Those who believe in this paradigm are of the opinion that the blame for victimisation
should be placed solely on the offender since the victim cannot be blamed (Snyman
2005:8–9).
• The Radical victimology paradigm known as left realism, radical left realism or
liberalism is also centred around the political spectrum and ‘‘supports a reform of the
retributive aspects of the criminal justice system’’ (Snyman 2005:9). Radical
• victimologists are of the opinion that there is a flow of roles between the victim and the
offender, as a result the definition of an offender is broad and also includes crimes
committed by the powerful (Snyman 2005:9). According to this paradigm, victimisation
is then viewed as emanating from underlying forces between the offender and the
victim and thus the victim is not completely innocent (Snyman
PRIM048 www.tutorialscampus.co.za +27 (71) 224 5255
