NAME:
STUDENT NUMBER:
UNIQUE NUMBER:
MODULE CODE: IRM1501
SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION TO RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
ASSIGNMENT NUMBER: 03/ TAKE-HOME EXAMINATION
DUE DATE: 13 OCTOBER 2022
Honesty Declaration:
In writing and submitting this paper i affirm that:
1. I understand what academic dishonesty entails and are aware of UNISA’s
policies in this regard.
2. I have not allowed, and will not allow, anyone to copy my work with the
intention of passing it off as his or her own work.
3. I did not make use of another student’s work with or without permission
and submitted it as your own.
DATE:
SIGNATURE:
, Question 1
Qwelane v South African Human Rights Commission and Another
[2021] ZACC 22
Case details
In Qwelane v South African Human Rights Commission and Another the Constitutional
Court decided on the invalidity of section 10(1) of the Equality Act, which defines and
prohibits hate speech.
Facts of the case
In the above matter, a well-known newspaper columnist, 1 former anti-apartheid
columnist and talk show host Jonathan Dubula Qwalane (“Jon Qwalane”) wrote a
column article for the Sunday Sun titled “Call me names – but gay is not okay”. The
article included lines that read “making me wonder what these people have against the
natural order of things”, and “someday a bunch of politicians will muster the balls to
rewrite the constitution, otherwise at this rate, how soon before some idiot demands to
‘marry’ an animal, and that this Constitution ‘allows’ it?”. 2 The article was accompanied
by a cartoon illustration of a man marrying a goat. This sparked an uproar from the
public, and the South African Human Rights Commission was flooded with over 350
complaints.3 The feedback from members of the LGBTI plus community was prompt
1
Qwelane v South African Human Rights Commission and Another [2021] ZACC 22 hereinafter referred
to as Qwelane v South African Human Rights Commission.
2
Qwelane v South African Human Rights Commission [3].
3
Qwelane v South African Human Rights Commission [6].
STUDENT NUMBER:
UNIQUE NUMBER:
MODULE CODE: IRM1501
SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION TO RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
ASSIGNMENT NUMBER: 03/ TAKE-HOME EXAMINATION
DUE DATE: 13 OCTOBER 2022
Honesty Declaration:
In writing and submitting this paper i affirm that:
1. I understand what academic dishonesty entails and are aware of UNISA’s
policies in this regard.
2. I have not allowed, and will not allow, anyone to copy my work with the
intention of passing it off as his or her own work.
3. I did not make use of another student’s work with or without permission
and submitted it as your own.
DATE:
SIGNATURE:
, Question 1
Qwelane v South African Human Rights Commission and Another
[2021] ZACC 22
Case details
In Qwelane v South African Human Rights Commission and Another the Constitutional
Court decided on the invalidity of section 10(1) of the Equality Act, which defines and
prohibits hate speech.
Facts of the case
In the above matter, a well-known newspaper columnist, 1 former anti-apartheid
columnist and talk show host Jonathan Dubula Qwalane (“Jon Qwalane”) wrote a
column article for the Sunday Sun titled “Call me names – but gay is not okay”. The
article included lines that read “making me wonder what these people have against the
natural order of things”, and “someday a bunch of politicians will muster the balls to
rewrite the constitution, otherwise at this rate, how soon before some idiot demands to
‘marry’ an animal, and that this Constitution ‘allows’ it?”. 2 The article was accompanied
by a cartoon illustration of a man marrying a goat. This sparked an uproar from the
public, and the South African Human Rights Commission was flooded with over 350
complaints.3 The feedback from members of the LGBTI plus community was prompt
1
Qwelane v South African Human Rights Commission and Another [2021] ZACC 22 hereinafter referred
to as Qwelane v South African Human Rights Commission.
2
Qwelane v South African Human Rights Commission [3].
3
Qwelane v South African Human Rights Commission [6].
