Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
|||
Line 73:
'''Legal, South Africa'''
South Africa is uniquely able to "correct" corrective rape. The 1996 Constitution enshrines myriad rights on the basis of which a group may challenge the circumstances that give rise to corrective rape; the constitutional doctrine makes available several possibilities for bringing suit; and South Africa manifests an openness to international and comparative law that makes it possible to incorporate human rights approaches to preventing private rights abuses <ref>Silvio, Lorenzo Di. "Correcting Corrective Rape: Carmichele And Developing South Africa's Affirmative Obligations To Prevent Violence Against Women." Georgetown Law Journal 99.5 (2011): 1469-1515. Academic Search Complete. Web. 1 Apr. 2012.</ref>. Traditionally, in South Africa and elsewhere, the legal system has allowed the public-private divide to dictate a lower level of involvement in issues of domestic violence and sexual assault, including corrective rape <ref>Silvio, Lorenzo Di. "Correcting Corrective Rape: Carmichele And Developing South Africa's Affirmative Obligations To Prevent Violence Against Women." Georgetown Law Journal 99.5 (2011): 1469-1515. Academic Search Complete. Web. 1 Apr. 2012.</ref>. However, "modern human rights law has largely ignored this private-public distinction" <ref>Silvio, Lorenzo Di. "Correcting Corrective Rape: Carmichele And Developing South Africa's Affirmative Obligations To Prevent Violence Against Women." Georgetown Law Journal 99.5 (2011): 1469-1515. Academic Search Complete. Web. 1 Apr. 2012.</ref>. For instance, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), which obligates states to remove discriminatory barriers from the full and free exercise of rights by women, reaches any actor. The Convention's duty to modify the conduct of private citizens to ensure equality for women
==See also==
|