Shortcomimgs of the criminal law (sexual offences and related matters) amendment act

The Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act,1 hereinafter referred to as SORMA, came into operation on 16 December 2007 and acknowledges in its preamble, the then current, inadequate and discriminatory measures provided for in common law and statute relating to sexual offences. Although it aimed to address these measures, through the repeal of various common law sexual offences and the introduction, or amendment, of comprehensive statutory offences relating to sexual offences against children and vulnerable individuals, the legislature failed to take advantage of a golden opportunity; being the introduction of inquisitorial elements in the South African sexual offences legal framework.2 Through the introduction of SORMA, provisions relating to sexual offences against children were introduced, unfortunately it included sexual offences amongst children as well.3 However, this was declared unconstitutional in The Teddy Bear Clinic for Abused Children and Rapcan v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development,4 and Parliament was allowed 18 months to rectify the defect in the enactment. Although, Parliament failed to abide by the time period provided by the Constitutional Court, a larger disappointment was on the horizon; the realisation that the applicants’ constitutional challenge was too narrow. This, together with the lack of foresight on the part of the legislature, lead to SORMA, even in its amended form, being mainly accusatorial in nature. Furthermore, and despite the amendments, SORMA failed to completely decriminalise consensual sexual activity between children. Despite its shortcomings, SORMA could be said to provide adequate provisions relating to all possible sexual offences against children and vulnerable individuals. However, the shortcomings are not restricted to the provisions of the enactment, the shortcomings relate to the application thereof. Should inquisitorial elements be introduced, the focus of the trial would shift away from the victim and shift on to the accused, thereby extending the protection offered to children and vulnerable individuals to the maximum extent