Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright in all material published in PER/PELJ vests in the author, provided that authors grant, by submission of their contributions, permission that their contributions may be shared and adapted without restriction. An author furthermore agrees that the same contribution may not be published elsewhere without the written permission of the editor.
Anyone gaining access, electronically or otherwise, to a contribution to PER, may quote from such contribution, use the intellectual content thereof, share and adapt it, but subject to the following conditions:
you must give appropriate credit, provide a link and indicate if changes were made; and
the copyright of the author(s) may not be infringed in any way.
Main Article Content
Application of section 30 of the restitution of land rights act in the courts: Some guidelines
Abstract
In terms of section 30 of the Restitution of Land Rights Act 22 of 1994, the court is allowed to "admit any evidence, including oral evidence, which it considers relevant and cogent to the matter being heard by it, whether or not such evidence would be admissible in any other court of law". This means that the normal rules of evidence can be relaxed in the case of restitution claims. This articles analyses the way in which courts have dealt with the section, with a specific focus on oral histories. The paper also makes a few suggestions as to how courts can better grapple with the question in the future, to ensure that a strict adherence to the rules of evidence does not preclude justice in the context of land restitution claims.
Keywords:Evidence; restitution of land; oral history.
