LJU4801
ASSIGNMENT 2
DUE: 3 SEPT 2024
2024
, LJU4801 Assignment 2
Due: 3 September 2024
Question 1
1. With reference to the judgment in Prince v President of the Law Society of
the Cape of Good Hope 2002 (2) SA 794, discuss the philosophical
approaches the majority and minority decisions followed. Your answer
should not exceed
750 words
Philosophical Approaches in Prince v President of the Law Society of the Cape
of Good Hope
In the case of Prince v. President of the Law Society of the Cape of Good Hope, the
Constitutional Court of South Africa dealt with a major legal issue concerning the
prohibition of cannabis in the context of religious freedom. The case centered on
Garreth Anver Prince, who aspired to become an attorney but was barred due to his
previous convictions for cannabis possession and his intention to continue using
cannabis as part of his Rastafari faith. The Court’s majority and minority opinions
showcased different philosophical approaches to legal interpretation and decision-
making.
Majority Decision: Legal Positivism
The majority opinion, written by Justice Ngcobo, largely followed a legal positivist
philosophy. Legal positivism focuses on the significance of the existing written laws
and rules, avoiding moral or metaphysical discussions. It is concerned with what the
law currently is rather than what it should ideally be.
The majority focused on whether the prohibition of cannabis use was inconsistent with
the Constitution. As stated in the judgment:
"The question before us, therefore, is not whether we agree with the law prohibiting
the possession and use of cannabis. Our views in that regard are irrelevant. The
only question is whether the law is inconsistent with the Constitution. The appellant
contends that it is because it interferes with his right to freedom of religion and his
right to practise his religion".3
ASSIGNMENT 2
DUE: 3 SEPT 2024
2024
, LJU4801 Assignment 2
Due: 3 September 2024
Question 1
1. With reference to the judgment in Prince v President of the Law Society of
the Cape of Good Hope 2002 (2) SA 794, discuss the philosophical
approaches the majority and minority decisions followed. Your answer
should not exceed
750 words
Philosophical Approaches in Prince v President of the Law Society of the Cape
of Good Hope
In the case of Prince v. President of the Law Society of the Cape of Good Hope, the
Constitutional Court of South Africa dealt with a major legal issue concerning the
prohibition of cannabis in the context of religious freedom. The case centered on
Garreth Anver Prince, who aspired to become an attorney but was barred due to his
previous convictions for cannabis possession and his intention to continue using
cannabis as part of his Rastafari faith. The Court’s majority and minority opinions
showcased different philosophical approaches to legal interpretation and decision-
making.
Majority Decision: Legal Positivism
The majority opinion, written by Justice Ngcobo, largely followed a legal positivist
philosophy. Legal positivism focuses on the significance of the existing written laws
and rules, avoiding moral or metaphysical discussions. It is concerned with what the
law currently is rather than what it should ideally be.
The majority focused on whether the prohibition of cannabis use was inconsistent with
the Constitution. As stated in the judgment:
"The question before us, therefore, is not whether we agree with the law prohibiting
the possession and use of cannabis. Our views in that regard are irrelevant. The
only question is whether the law is inconsistent with the Constitution. The appellant
contends that it is because it interferes with his right to freedom of religion and his
right to practise his religion".3
