Question
The following journal entry is based on chapters 6 and 7 in Bilchitz et al.
Read the following quotations:
“The people of South Africa are committed to the attainment of social justice and the improvement of the quality of life for everyone. The Preamble to our Constitution records this commitment......This case grapples with the realisation of these aspirations for it concerns the State’s constitutional obligations in relation to housing: a constitutional issue of fundamental importance to the development of South Africa’s new constitutional order”.
[Paragraph 1 of the judgment of Yacoob J in GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA AND OTHERS V GROOTBOOM AND OTHERS 2000 (11) BCLR 1169 (CC)]
CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA, 1996
Preamble
We, the people of South Africa,
Recognise the injustices of our past;
Honour those who suffered for justice and freedom in our land;
Respect those who have worked to build and develop our country; and
Believe that South Africa belongs to all who live in it, united in our diversity.
We therefore, through our freely elected representatives, adopt this Constitution as the supreme law of the Republic so as to—
Heal the divisions of the past and establish a society based on democratic values, social justice and fundamental human rights;
Lay the foundations for a democratic and open society in which government is based on the will of the people and every citizen is equally protected by law;
Improve the quality of life of all citizens and free the potential of each person; and
Build a united and democratic South Africa able to take its rightful place as a sovereign state in the family of nations.
May God protect our people.
Nkosi Sikelel’ iAfrika. Morena boloka setjhaba sa heso.
God seën Suid-Afrika. God bless South Africa.
Mudzimu fhatutshedza Afurika. Hosi katekisa Afrika.
1. Social justice commitments involving the just distribution of resources in society can be understood as imposing duties on (1) the state and possibly (2) non-state actors.
1.1 Evaluate, by comparing at least 2 jurisprudential theories(Utilitarianism THEORY by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill and Justice as fairness theory by John Rawls) that address the state’s duties regarding ‘social justice’, which of these jurisprudential theories, according to you, best attains the stated aims to achieve social justice in the first paragraph of the Grootboom case as well as in the Preamble of the Constitution. Motivate your opinion throughout with practical examples from the textbook mentioned above. Your answer should be between 200-250 words in length. [5]
Read the following quotations:
“The people of South Africa are committed to the attainment of social justice and the improvement of the quality of life for everyone. The Preamble to our Constitution records this commitment......This case grapples with the realisation of these aspirations for it concerns the State’s constitutional obligations in relation to housing: a constitutional issue of fundamental importance to the development of South Africa’s new constitutional order”.
[Paragraph 1 of the judgment of Yacoob J in GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA AND OTHERS V GROOTBOOM AND OTHERS 2000 (11) BCLR 1169 (CC)]
CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA, 1996
Preamble
We, the people of South Africa,
Recognise the injustices of our past;
Honour those who suffered for justice and freedom in our land;
Respect those who have worked to build and develop our country; and
Believe that South Africa belongs to all who live in it, united in our diversity.
We therefore, through our freely elected representatives, adopt this Constitution as the supreme law of the Republic so as to—
Heal the divisions of the past and establish a society based on democratic values, social justice and fundamental human rights;
Lay the foundations for a democratic and open society in which government is based on the will of the people and every citizen is equally protected by law;
Improve the quality of life of all citizens and free the potential of each person; and
Build a united and democratic South Africa able to take its rightful place as a sovereign state in the family of nations.
May God protect our people.
Nkosi Sikelel’ iAfrika. Morena boloka setjhaba sa heso.
God seën Suid-Afrika. God bless South Africa.
Mudzimu fhatutshedza Afurika. Hosi katekisa Afrika.
1. Social justice commitments involving the just distribution of resources in society can be understood as imposing duties on (1) the state and possibly (2) non-state actors.
1.1 Evaluate, by comparing at least 2 jurisprudential theories(Utilitarianism THEORY by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill and Justice as fairness theory by John Rawls) that address the state’s duties regarding ‘social justice’, which of these jurisprudential theories, according to you, best attains the stated aims to achieve social justice in the first paragraph of the Grootboom case as well as in the Preamble of the Constitution. Motivate your opinion throughout with practical examples from the textbook mentioned above. Your answer should be between 200-250 words in length. [5]
Answers
GPT 3.5
In addressing the state's duties regarding social justice, the Utilitarianism theory by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill and the Justice as Fairness theory by John Rawls offer contrasting perspectives. Utilitarianism emphasizes maximizing overall happiness and welfare in society, which could align with the aim of improving the quality of life for all citizens as stated in the Grootboom case and the Constitution's Preamble. For example, providing housing to those in need could be justified under Utilitarianism if it results in the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people.
On the other hand, Justice as Fairness theory focuses on ensuring equal opportunities and fairness in society, which resonates with the commitment to social justice and fundamental human rights in the Constitution. Rawls' theory proposes the "veil of ignorance" thought experiment, where decision-makers are unaware of their own position in society, to ensure fair distribution of resources. In the context of housing rights, this theory could support policies that prioritize those in the greatest need, such as the homeless families in the Grootboom case.
Overall, Justice as Fairness theory by John Rawls may best attain the state's duties regarding social justice in the Grootboom case and the Constitution, as it emphasizes equality, fairness, and protection of the most vulnerable members of society.
On the other hand, Justice as Fairness theory focuses on ensuring equal opportunities and fairness in society, which resonates with the commitment to social justice and fundamental human rights in the Constitution. Rawls' theory proposes the "veil of ignorance" thought experiment, where decision-makers are unaware of their own position in society, to ensure fair distribution of resources. In the context of housing rights, this theory could support policies that prioritize those in the greatest need, such as the homeless families in the Grootboom case.
Overall, Justice as Fairness theory by John Rawls may best attain the state's duties regarding social justice in the Grootboom case and the Constitution, as it emphasizes equality, fairness, and protection of the most vulnerable members of society.