DANGEROUS WEAPONS BILL ORAL SUBMISSIONS

THE LEGAL RESOUCRES CENTRE (LRC) O The LRC is a human rights, public interest law clinic with regional offices in Johannesburg, Durban, Grahamstown and Cape Town: one of the focus areas is women rights O Gender based violence is one of the focus areas of the women’s rights project O Therefore our oral submissions are only limited to the use of dangerous weapons in domestic violence.

Use of weapons in the commission of domestic violence O We have done over 180 domestic violence matters from January 2011 – January 2013 O Consultations and application forms indicate the regular use of common household items in the commission of often violent physical abuse O Examples of items include: cups; hot plate stove; broken bottles….

Current domestic violence legal framework O Section 9 of the Domestic Violence Act 116 of 1998 allows for the removal of any dangerous weapons or arms by a member of SAPS where it is deemed necessary, when it is implemented its normally limited to firearms O Current dangerous weapons definition in the Dangerous Weapons Act is means any object, other than a firearm, which is likely to cause serious bodily injury if it were used to commit an assault

DEFINITION – Section 1 O The current definition in the Bill is: ‘any object, other than a firearm, designed as a weapon and capable of producing death or serious bodily harm.’ O Our proposed definition : any object, other than a firearm, made or modified, to kill or cause serious bodily harm or used or intended for use in killing or causing serious bodily harm

Rationale of our proposed definition This definition we propose place dangerous weapons in three distinctive categories: O those that were made for killing or to cause serious bodily harm, O those that were adapted for killing or to cause serious bodily harm, or O those that were neither made, nor adapted for killing or causing serious bodily harm, but are likely to cause serious bodily harm or death if it were used to commit an assault.

Importance of broadening the scope of the definition O Our Courts have interpreted this point in the following way: Whether a weapon is likely to cause serious bodily harm must be judged by looking at the object itself. The court must examine the nature and properties of the object (S v Mkhwazi, S v Xaba, S v Mathenjwa supra; S v Diedericks supra; S v Xaba and others

Importance of broadening the scope of the definition O the current interpretation of the law by the Courts impacts especially women and children in cases where ordinary weapons have been used in the commission of offences against them, as they were not designed nor intended to cause physical harm or to kill O We need to be mindful of limiting the nature of charges that can be brought against a perpetrator as they could not be charged with using a dangerous weapon under the proposed definition if it was an ordinary item

Importance of broadening the scope of the definition O The clarity of the definition would play a central role in the prohibition of the possession of dangerous weapons as it would set out the elements of the crime. Thus according to the definition proposed above, the elements of the prohibition would be: O possession of an object O made or adapted for killing or inflicting bodily harm or O that was neither made, nor adapted for killing or causing bodily harm, but are carried with this intent or used for the purpose of killing or causing bodily harm

Personal Safety O Many women carry certain items that would, with the introduction of this Bill, be classified as ‘dangerous weapons’ for self-defense, like pepper spray. O This Bill should make self-defense a relevant consideration in terms of section 2(2) of the Bill. O Maybe necessary to include a list of objects that can be carried for self – defense in order to ensure that women who are seeking to protect themselves are not effectively breaking the law and face the prospect of prosecution for the possession of a dangerous weapon.

THANK YOU