S v Steenberg
Jurisdiction | South Africa |
Judge | Thirion J and Van der Reyden J |
Judgment Date | 30 April 1998 |
Citation | 1999 (1) SACR 594 (N) |
Hearing Date | 30 April 1998 |
Counsel | A E Potgieter for the appellant I P Cooke for the State |
Court | Natal Provincial Division |
Van der Reyden J:
The appellant, who was convicted of crimen injuria and sentenced to R1 000 or six months' imprisonment conditionally suspended for five years, appeals against the conviction only.
G The complainant contended that his dignitas was impaired when the appellant addressed him as a 'kaffula', the Zulu word for 'kaffir'. It was common cause at the trial that the appellant, in greeting the complainant, had said to him, 'Ja, kaffula', which the plaintiff understood as, 'Sawubona, H kaffula', or, translated in English, 'Good afternoon, kaffir'. The appellant testified that he greeted the complainant with the words, 'Sawubona, kaffula', and then added in Zulu the words, 'I am a shaven white pig'.
The plaintiff's uncontroverted evidence was that he felt humiliated and angry when he was greeted with the words, 'Ja, kaffula.' He did not view I appellant's greeting as a joke but as an insult. During cross-examination he said that to call a person a 'kaffir' is tantamount to calling him by his mother's private parts.
The context in which the word 'kaffula' was used was the following.
The appellant, following a Farm Watch meeting with members of the South J African Police Services, together with other farmers, was having drinks in the Eshowe police canteen. Captain Rowles, a police officer
Van der Reyden J
stationed at Eshowe, was behind the bar counter serving drinks. At some A stage the topic of discussion was the use of the word 'kaffir' and 'mlungu' in the South African context. In this regard the appellant testified as follows, and I quote from the record:
'We were talking amongst ourselves, the farmers, some of the policemen, and Captain Rowles was behind the counter as well and we were discussing B this matter, and we were further discussing blacks, whether a black man is equivalent of being called a "kaffir" - what would the equivalent be of a white person, and we were discussing the whites pig theory, in Zulu, which I understand is "ingulube ephaliweyo" and we were just simply discussing amongst ourselves, you know how can one party get so upset when they are being called a "kaffir" whereas any other nation anywhere has got - for lack of a better description - derogatory words, that they call another race, and we C were discussing these so-called harmful sayings. And at the canteen, while we were socialising, I believe it was the complainant - I had my back to the entrance of the canteen and I wasn't aware of whether he was present in the room and had heard what we had been discussing. I wasn't aware at all, but when I did notice him, he was in my close proximity and I thought, well, maybe I should include him in the conversation that we were having. D
That is when I approached him. I wanted to shake his hand. I said to him:
"Sawubona Kaffula mina ingulube ephaliweyo", but before I could finish saying the last sentence, he turned on his heels and stormed out the room...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
2014 index
...461S v Stander 2012 (1) SACR 537 (SCA) ................................................. 238S v Steenberg 1999 (1) SACR 594 (N) ................................................. 70S v Stenge 2008 (2) SACR 27 (C) ......................................................... 460S v Stephen 1994 (......
-
2006 index
...334; 338S v Solomons 2005 (2) SACR 432 (C) ......................................................... 241 242S v Steenberg 1999 (1) SACR 594 (N)......................................................... 357S v Stefaans 1999 (1) SACR 182 (C) ..........................................................
-
Internet Law: Cookies, Traffi c Data, and Direct Advertising Practices
...that the boni mores determine the reprehensibility of the conduct.150 S v Bugwandeen 1987 (1) SA 787 (N) at 796A–D; S v Steenberg 1999 (1) SACR 594 (N) at 596f–g.151 See S v A supra note 133 at 297D–H. See also JM Burchell & J Milton Principles of Criminal Law 2 ed (2000) 510n2; Neethling o......
-
Balancing ‘equality of respect’ with freedom of expression: The actio iniuriarum and hate speech
...Mbilini v Minister of Police 1981 (3) SA 493 (E) (‘kar’); Ndebele v Ncube [1998] JOL 2418 (ZS) (‘dog’ or ‘mad’); S v Steenberg 1999 (1) SACR 594 (N) (‘kar’); Henning v S [2004] JOL 13038 (‘you are going to shit’); S v Mcapazelli [2004] JOL 12470 (Tk) (‘bitch’); Tarlo v Olivier [2004] 1 A......
-
Ryan v Petrus
...SA 319 (T): dictum at 322E - F applied S v Sharp 2002 (1) SACR 360 (Ck): distinguished but dictum at 372e - g doubted H S v Steenberg 1999 (1) SACR 594 (N): referred to Sokhulu v New Africa Publications Ltd t/a 'The Sowetan Sunday World' and Others [2002] 1 All SA 255 (W): dictum at 259c - ......
-
Ryan v Petrus
...SA 319 (T): dictum at 322E - F applied A S v Sharp 2002 (1) SACR 360 (Ck): distinguished but dictum at 372e - g doubted S v Steenberg 1999 (1) SACR 594 (N): referred Sokhulu v New Africa Publications Ltd t/a 'The Sowetan Sunday World' and Others [2002] 1 All SA 255 (W): dictum at 259c - d a......
-
Ryan v Petrus
...race, as a rule the term is one which is disparaging, derogatory and contemptuous and causes humiliation.' H See too S v Steenberg 1999 (1) SACR 594 (N). In the present case neither party is a black African. It may well be that if the word is uttered pejoratively by a white person to a blac......
-
S v Sharp
...LAW - THIRD EDITION 433 S v Momberg: 1970 (2) SA 58 (CPD) at 71 - 2. S v Jana 1981 (1) SA 671 (WLD) at 676 - 77. S v Steenberg 1999 (1) SACR 594 (NPD) at 596 - 7 S v Molewa 2001 (1) SACR 321 (TPD) 6.6 The evidence in the present case shows that the accused was E heavily drunk. Crimen injuri......
-
2014 index
...461S v Stander 2012 (1) SACR 537 (SCA) ................................................. 238S v Steenberg 1999 (1) SACR 594 (N) ................................................. 70S v Stenge 2008 (2) SACR 27 (C) ......................................................... 460S v Stephen 1994 (......
-
2006 index
...334; 338S v Solomons 2005 (2) SACR 432 (C) ......................................................... 241 242S v Steenberg 1999 (1) SACR 594 (N)......................................................... 357S v Stefaans 1999 (1) SACR 182 (C) ..........................................................
-
Internet Law: Cookies, Traffi c Data, and Direct Advertising Practices
...that the boni mores determine the reprehensibility of the conduct.150 S v Bugwandeen 1987 (1) SA 787 (N) at 796A–D; S v Steenberg 1999 (1) SACR 594 (N) at 596f–g.151 See S v A supra note 133 at 297D–H. See also JM Burchell & J Milton Principles of Criminal Law 2 ed (2000) 510n2; Neethling o......
-
Balancing ‘equality of respect’ with freedom of expression: The actio iniuriarum and hate speech
...Mbilini v Minister of Police 1981 (3) SA 493 (E) (‘kar’); Ndebele v Ncube [1998] JOL 2418 (ZS) (‘dog’ or ‘mad’); S v Steenberg 1999 (1) SACR 594 (N) (‘kar’); Henning v S [2004] JOL 13038 (‘you are going to shit’); S v Mcapazelli [2004] JOL 12470 (Tk) (‘bitch’); Tarlo v Olivier [2004] 1 A......