Barit, Lawrence2023-02-202023-02-202022https://hdl.handle.net/10539/34618A research report submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Laws to the Faculty of Commerce, Law and Management, School of Law, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, 2022Crimen injuria as a legal concept has played an important role in recent high profile South African court cases. This research report documents the development of crimen injuria, and its resultant implementation. One of the offences which is covered by crimen injuria is hate speech. Serious questions have however been asked with respect to the application of crimen injuria in a number of hate speech matters. The concern is, to a certain extent, due to an overlapping of the jurisdiction of the Equality court with the criminal court. This is as a result of the Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act (PEPUDA). Two high profile cases have highlighted this, namely the Penny Sparrow and Vicki Momberg matters. A number of problematic factors have been identified. These include: Is crimen injuria being implemented in a manner that the very definition of crimen injuria prescribes. The exacting of punishment by two competent courts (neither being a court of appeal) for the identical offence, flouting the principle of Res Judicata. The hearing of a matter in the Equality Court in the absence of the party accused of the hate speech, contrary to the provisions of The Constitution. The ignoring of a guiding principle of PEPUDA which is to facilitate the participation by the parties in proceedings. The sentencing, for the first time in South Africa, of a person to a direct jail term for the offence of crimen injuria. The research reveals that many of those in power and influence get away constantly with hate speech of the most vicious kind earning at the most a reprimand. However an unknown person is given double punishment by two competent courts, based on the identical facts, one of the punishments being jail time. In summation it can be seen that cases are handled in an arbitrary manner.enDissertation