RRLLB81
Assignment 2 Semester 2 2025
Research Report
Re-evaluation of the broad principle of the right of
accused to be represented
Due Date: September 2025
Re-evaluation of the broad principle of the right of accused to be represented
By
[RRLLB81 STUDENT]
(012345678)
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree
BACHELOR OF LAWS
in the
Terms of use
DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL AND PROCEDURAL LAW By making use of this document you agree to:
Use this document as a guide for learning, comparison and reference purpose,
Terms of use
Not to duplicate, reproduce and/or misrepresent the contents of this document as your own work,
By making use of this document you agree to:
Use this document
Fully accept the consequences
solely as a guide forshould you plagiarise
learning, reference,or and
misuse this document.
comparison purposes,
Ensure originality of your own work, and fully accept the consequences should you plagiarise or misuse this document.
Comply with all relevant standards, guidelines, regulations, and legislation governing academic and written work.
Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is" without any express or
implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or liability for any actions taken based on the
information contained within this document. This document is intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes.
Reproduction, resale, or transmission of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
, +27 67 171 1739
Re-evaluation of the broad principle of the right of accused to be represented
By
[RRLLB81 STUDENT]
(012345678)
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree
BACHELOR OF LAWS
in the
DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL AND PROCEDURAL LAW
SCHOOL OF LAW
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA
SUPERVISOR: PROF MM MONYAKANE
RRLLB81 ASSESSMENT 2 / FINAL PORTFOLIO
(DUE DATE: September 2025)
Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is"
without any express or implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or
liability for any actions taken based on the information contained within this document. This document is
intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes. Reproduction, resale, or transmission
of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
, +27 67 171 1739
ABSTRACT
This research re-evaluates the principle of the right of the accused to be
represented, particularly in relation to the common-law notion of actio popularis.
Rooted in Roman law, actio popularis enabled any member of the public to litigate in
the interest of the community, regardless of personal involvement. While modern
criminal justice primarily recognises locus standi, the principle of actio popularis
resurfaces in contexts where access to justice and public interest litigation intersect.
South African jurisprudence demonstrates tensions between restrictive common-law
standing and broader constitutional developments that encourage public interest
enforcement. By analysing leading cases such as Children’s Resource Centre Trust
v Pioneer Food (Pty) Ltd and Dalrymple v Colonial Treasurer, alongside statutory
provisions in the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 and constitutional guarantees,
this paper argues that actio popularis retains a limited yet meaningful role in
advancing accountability and safeguarding community interests in criminal justice.
KEYWORDS
Actio popularis
Locus standi
Criminal justice
Public interest litigation
Constitutional rights
Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is"
without any express or implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or
liability for any actions taken based on the information contained within this document. This document is
intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes. Reproduction, resale, or transmission
of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
Assignment 2 Semester 2 2025
Research Report
Re-evaluation of the broad principle of the right of
accused to be represented
Due Date: September 2025
Re-evaluation of the broad principle of the right of accused to be represented
By
[RRLLB81 STUDENT]
(012345678)
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree
BACHELOR OF LAWS
in the
Terms of use
DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL AND PROCEDURAL LAW By making use of this document you agree to:
Use this document as a guide for learning, comparison and reference purpose,
Terms of use
Not to duplicate, reproduce and/or misrepresent the contents of this document as your own work,
By making use of this document you agree to:
Use this document
Fully accept the consequences
solely as a guide forshould you plagiarise
learning, reference,or and
misuse this document.
comparison purposes,
Ensure originality of your own work, and fully accept the consequences should you plagiarise or misuse this document.
Comply with all relevant standards, guidelines, regulations, and legislation governing academic and written work.
Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is" without any express or
implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or liability for any actions taken based on the
information contained within this document. This document is intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes.
Reproduction, resale, or transmission of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
, +27 67 171 1739
Re-evaluation of the broad principle of the right of accused to be represented
By
[RRLLB81 STUDENT]
(012345678)
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree
BACHELOR OF LAWS
in the
DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL AND PROCEDURAL LAW
SCHOOL OF LAW
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA
SUPERVISOR: PROF MM MONYAKANE
RRLLB81 ASSESSMENT 2 / FINAL PORTFOLIO
(DUE DATE: September 2025)
Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is"
without any express or implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or
liability for any actions taken based on the information contained within this document. This document is
intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes. Reproduction, resale, or transmission
of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
, +27 67 171 1739
ABSTRACT
This research re-evaluates the principle of the right of the accused to be
represented, particularly in relation to the common-law notion of actio popularis.
Rooted in Roman law, actio popularis enabled any member of the public to litigate in
the interest of the community, regardless of personal involvement. While modern
criminal justice primarily recognises locus standi, the principle of actio popularis
resurfaces in contexts where access to justice and public interest litigation intersect.
South African jurisprudence demonstrates tensions between restrictive common-law
standing and broader constitutional developments that encourage public interest
enforcement. By analysing leading cases such as Children’s Resource Centre Trust
v Pioneer Food (Pty) Ltd and Dalrymple v Colonial Treasurer, alongside statutory
provisions in the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 and constitutional guarantees,
this paper argues that actio popularis retains a limited yet meaningful role in
advancing accountability and safeguarding community interests in criminal justice.
KEYWORDS
Actio popularis
Locus standi
Criminal justice
Public interest litigation
Constitutional rights
Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is"
without any express or implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or
liability for any actions taken based on the information contained within this document. This document is
intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes. Reproduction, resale, or transmission
of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
