Publisiteitsbevele as Vonnisopsie Vir Regspersone (Publicity Orders as Sentencing Option for Juristic Persons)

This contribution addresses the issue of adverse publicity orders as a possible supplementary sentencing option for corporate offenders. In South Africa fines are the primary sentencing option available to courts when imposing sentences on juristic persons. Fines, however, do not adequately serve th...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Pieter du Toit
Format: Article
Language:Afrikaans
Published: North-West University 2016-05-01
Series:Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal
Subjects:
Online Access:http://journals.assaf.org.za/per/article/view/729/1114
id doaj-98c5f2b937df4de7a44c6db3fef017a2
record_format Article
spelling doaj-98c5f2b937df4de7a44c6db3fef017a22020-11-25T03:50:51ZafrNorth-West UniversityPotchefstroom Electronic Law Journal1727-37812016-05-0116118http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2016/v19i0a729Publisiteitsbevele as Vonnisopsie Vir Regspersone (Publicity Orders as Sentencing Option for Juristic Persons)Pieter du Toit0North-West UniversityThis contribution addresses the issue of adverse publicity orders as a possible supplementary sentencing option for corporate offenders. In South Africa fines are the primary sentencing option available to courts when imposing sentences on juristic persons. Fines, however, do not adequately serve the purposes of corporate sentencing. Publicity orders require the publication of an offender’s conviction, sentence and the details of the offence to individuals or a group of persons (such as shareholders). An adverse publication damages the corporate offender’s reputation – a valuable asset to a corporate entity. It therefore serves the purpose of corporate deterrence. In this contribution criticism is levelled against the fine as primary sentencing option for juristic persons; the notion of corporate reputation is considered from a social and legal perspective; a functional comparative study of adverse publication orders is presented and recommendations are made regarding the content of effective publication orders.http://journals.assaf.org.za/per/article/view/729/1114Corporationsjuristic personspublicity orderscorporate sentencing
collection DOAJ
language Afrikaans
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Pieter du Toit
spellingShingle Pieter du Toit
Publisiteitsbevele as Vonnisopsie Vir Regspersone (Publicity Orders as Sentencing Option for Juristic Persons)
Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal
Corporations
juristic persons
publicity orders
corporate sentencing
author_facet Pieter du Toit
author_sort Pieter du Toit
title Publisiteitsbevele as Vonnisopsie Vir Regspersone (Publicity Orders as Sentencing Option for Juristic Persons)
title_short Publisiteitsbevele as Vonnisopsie Vir Regspersone (Publicity Orders as Sentencing Option for Juristic Persons)
title_full Publisiteitsbevele as Vonnisopsie Vir Regspersone (Publicity Orders as Sentencing Option for Juristic Persons)
title_fullStr Publisiteitsbevele as Vonnisopsie Vir Regspersone (Publicity Orders as Sentencing Option for Juristic Persons)
title_full_unstemmed Publisiteitsbevele as Vonnisopsie Vir Regspersone (Publicity Orders as Sentencing Option for Juristic Persons)
title_sort publisiteitsbevele as vonnisopsie vir regspersone (publicity orders as sentencing option for juristic persons)
publisher North-West University
series Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal
issn 1727-3781
publishDate 2016-05-01
description This contribution addresses the issue of adverse publicity orders as a possible supplementary sentencing option for corporate offenders. In South Africa fines are the primary sentencing option available to courts when imposing sentences on juristic persons. Fines, however, do not adequately serve the purposes of corporate sentencing. Publicity orders require the publication of an offender’s conviction, sentence and the details of the offence to individuals or a group of persons (such as shareholders). An adverse publication damages the corporate offender’s reputation – a valuable asset to a corporate entity. It therefore serves the purpose of corporate deterrence. In this contribution criticism is levelled against the fine as primary sentencing option for juristic persons; the notion of corporate reputation is considered from a social and legal perspective; a functional comparative study of adverse publication orders is presented and recommendations are made regarding the content of effective publication orders.
topic Corporations
juristic persons
publicity orders
corporate sentencing
url http://journals.assaf.org.za/per/article/view/729/1114
work_keys_str_mv AT pieterdutoit publisiteitsbeveleasvonnisopsievirregspersonepublicityordersassentencingoptionforjuristicpersons
_version_ 1724490339545251840