A. Ms Ithabeleng Selebalo is interested in running as an independent candidate in the upcoming national elections. According to the Electoral Act 73 of 1998, adult citizens may be elected to the National Assembly and Provincial Legislatures only through their membership of political parties.

1. Identify and name the right that is potentially infringed by the Electoral Act 73 of 1998.

2. Is the Electoral Commission bound by the Bill of Rights? Give a reason or your answer.

3. The "Network for Electoral Reform", a Non-Governmental Organisation that promotes and supports free and fair elections, wishes to join the proceedings. Do they have standing? Give a reason for your answer.

4. Does the Magistrate's Court have the jurisdiction to hear this matter as a matter of first instance? Give a reason for your answer.

B. Remofilwe Ngakane, a pregnant foreign national living in Johannesburg went into labour on 22 January 2020. Upon arrival at a public hospital, the nurses refused to admit Ms Ngakane. One of the nurses specifically informed Ms Ngakane that they do not help foreigners because "South Africa is only for South Africans".

1. Name and identify the rights that may be infringed by the conduct of the hospital's personnel.

2. True or false: As a foreign national, Ms Ngakane does not have a right to health as enshrined in the South African Bill of rights. Give a reason for your answer.

3. After Ms Ngakane left the public hospital, her husband drove her to the closest hospital, which was a private hospital. Upon arrival at the emergency room, Ms Ngakane was informed that she cannot be treated there, because it is a private hospital and she does not have medical aid.

a) Can the private hospital refuse to treat her even in the case of an emergency? Give reasons for your answer

C.In the substantive stage of Bill of Rights litigation, the onus is first on the respondent, who must show that he/she infringed the applicant's rights.

1) False, in the substantive stage, the onus is first on the applicant, who must show that an infringement of a right has taken place.

2) True, in the substantive stage, the onus is first on the respondent, who must show that he/she infringed the applicant's rights.

3) False, in the substantive stage the onus is on the respondent to indicate that the applicant's rights can be limited.

4) False, in the substantive stage, the onus is on the applicant, to show that the infringement is not justifiable in terms of section 36 of the Constitution.

D. Section 8(4) of the Constitution provides that juristic persons are specifically excluded from the protection of the rights in the Bill of Rights.

1) True, section 8(4) of the Constitution excludes juristic persons from the protection of the rights in the Bill of Rights because of the nature of these rights and the nature of juristic persons.

2) False, section 8(4) of the Constitution provides that juristic persons are entitled to the rights in the Bill of Rights dependant on the nature of the right and the nature of the juristic person.

3) True, section 8(4) of the Constitution provides that only natural persons can lay claim to the rights in the Bill of Rights.

4) False, section 8(4) of the Constitution provides that all juristic persons are entitled to all the rights in the Bill of Rights.

E.Section 39 of the Constitution, the interpretation clause, provides that any court, tribunal or forum, when interpreting the Bill of Rights may consider international law and must consider foreign law.

1) False, section 39 of the Constitution provides that any court, tribunal or forum when interpreting the Bill of Rights, must consider international law and may consider foreign law.

2) True, section 39 of the Constitution provides that any court, tribunal or forum when interpreting the Bill of Rights, may consider international law and must consider foreign law.

3) False, section 39 of the Constitution provides that any court, tribunal or forum should only consider national law when interpreting the rights in the Bill of Rights. 4) True, section 39 of the Constitution provides that any court, tribunal or forum, when interpreting the Bill of Rights may consider international law and must consider foreign law, however, only as far as it pertains to matters of state security.

F. In Fose v Minister of Safety and Security the Constitutional Court found that the term "appropriate relief" referred to a declaration of invalidity that would be the only applicable relief in the event of a constitutional rights violation.

1) True, in Fose v Minister of Safety and Security the Constitutional Court found that the term "appropriate relief" referred to a declaration of invalidity that would be the only applicable relief in the event of a constitutional rights violation.

2) False, in Ferreira v Levin the Constitutional Court found that the term "appropriate relief" referred to a declaration of invalidity that would be the only applicable relief in the event of a constitutional rights violation.

3) True, in Fose v Minister of Safety and Security the Constitutional Court found that the term appropriate relief referred to a declaration of invalidity as a discretionary remedy in the event of a constitutional rights violation.

4) False, in Fose v Minister of Safety and Security the Constitutional Court found that it was left to the courts to decide what appropriate relief would be in any particular circumstances.

G. In Mazibuko v City of Johannesburg the Constitutional Court found that the right to water did not require the state to provide every person with sufficient water on demand.

1) True, the Constitutional Court found that that the city's free basic water policy was a reasonable measure of achieving the progressive realisation of the right to water.

2) False, the Constitutional Court found that every citizen has the right to unlimited clean water.

3) True, the Constitutional Court found that the right to water can be restricted if municipalities struggle to source clean water.

4) False, the Constitutional Court found that the right to water could reasonably be restricted to 2 litres of water per person per day.

H. Vertical application of the Bill of Rights refers to the application of the Bill of Rights to a dispute between private parties, where the constitutionality of legislations is not at issue.

1) True, vertical application of the Bill of Rights is only applicable between private parties.

2) False, vertical application refers to the application of the Bill of Rights to a dispute which concerns the constitutionality of legislation, or a dispute to which the state is a party.

3) False, the Bill of Rights can only be applied horizontally.

4) True, with vertical application of the Bill of Rights the constitutionality of legislation is always not at issue.

I. To prove that one is acting in the public interest in terms of section 38(d) of the Constitution, one has to show that one is acting in the public interest and that the public has sufficient interest in the remedy.

1) False, to prove that one is acting in the public interest in terms of section 38(d) of the Constitution, one has to show that one is acting in the public interest and that the public has personal interest in the remedy sought.

2) False, section 38(d) of the Constitution does not allow a person to act in the public interest but restricts the grounds of standing to anyone acting as a member of, or in the interest of, a group or class of persons.

3) True, section 38(d) of the Constitution allows a person to act in the public interest if prior consent is obtained from individual members of the public, which points to sufficient interest.

4) True, when acting in the public interest in terms of section 38(d) of the Constitution, one has to show that you are acting in the public interest and that the public has sufficient interest in the remedy.

J. The purposive method of interpretation is in favour of rights and against their restriction.

1) True, the purposive method of interpretation entails drawing boundaries of rights as widely as the language in which they have been drafted and the context in which they are used will allow.

2) False, the purposive method of interpretation is the interpretation of a provision that best supports and protects the core values that underpin a society based on human dignity, equality and freedom.

3) False, the purposive method of interpretation refers to the textual interpretation of rights combined with a generous method of interpretation as indicated by the Constitutional Court in S v Zuma.

4) True, the purposive method of interpretation is in favour of rights but only in so far as they are textually qualified.

K. In President of the Republic of South Africa and Another v Hugo the Constitutional Court held that the decision of the President granting a remission of sentence to all imprisoned mothers with minor children under the age of 12, but not to the fathers, amounted to unfair discrimination.

1) False, because such a decision has an adverse impact on the respondent and invaded his right to dignity.

2) True, because all prisoners are regarded as being vulnerable in our society, and have been victims of discrimination in the past.

3) True, because this was an example of discrimination based on the grounds of gender, which could not be saved by the limitation clause.

4) False, because it amounted to fair discrimination as its purpose was to achieve an important societal goal.

L. A private hospital is allowed to turn away patients who cannot pay, even in case of an emergency.

1) True, private hospitals are not bound by section 27 of the Constitution.

2) False, private hospitals have to provide all medical services to patients irrespective of their ability to pay.

3) True, a private hospital is not a juristic person and not bound by the Bill of Rights.

4) False, even though a private hospital is not bound by section 27(2) of the Constitution, it is bound by section 27(3), the right not to be refused emergency medical treatment.