REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA COMBINED SECOND PERIODIC REPORT UNDER THE AFRICAN CHARTER ON HUMAN AND PEOPLE`S RIGHTS and INITIAL REPORT UNDER THE PROTOCOL TO THE AFRICAN CHARTER ON THE RIGHTS OF WOMEN IN AFRICA 29. Eight years later, in other words within the period under review, part of that legislation23 was declared inconsistent with the Constitution by the Witwatersrand High Court.24 The order of constitutional invalidity was referred to the Constitutional Court for confirmation.25 30. In July 2006, the Constitutional Court completed its supervision of the process of substituting death sentences with alternative sentences.26 Legislation and policy measures 31. Our Courts have emphasised the State’s duty to protect life, this translates into both positive and negative duties on the state. Positively phrased it means placing a duty on the state to protect the lives of people, or at the very least, that the state is under a constitutional duty to protect people from life-threatening attacks.27 The right to life is not absolute and may be limited in terms of the limitations clause in section 36 of the Constitution. However, the justification for a limitation would have to be exceptionally compelling, such as in the case of self-defence. 32. The right to life and a possible limitation thereof may also arise in the use of force when making an arrest. In S v Walters28 the court declared that potentially fatal force is allowed to be used to arrest a fleeing suspect when they are alleged to have committed a crime involving infliction of serious bodily harm. However, the Court found that the relevant sections in the legislation were too broad and needed to be brought in line with the Constitution, in particular, the right to life. 33. In light of the judgment, Parliament passed the Criminal Procedure Amendment Act29 in 2012. The Act amends section 49 and aligns the provisions relating to the use of force in effecting arrest of a suspect with the judgment of the Constitutional Court in the Walters case. It also defines “deadly force” as meaning force that is likely to cause serious bodily harm or death and includes, but is not limited to, shooting at a suspect with a firearm. It further provides that in addition to the requirement that the force must be reasonably necessary and proportional in the circumstances, the arrestor may use deadly force only if the suspect poses a threat of serious violence to the arrestor or any other person; or the suspect is suspected on reasonable grounds of having committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious bodily harm and there are no other reasonable means of effecting the arrest, whether at that time or later. 23 Id at subsections (1) to (5). 24 In Sibiya and Others v Director of Public Prosecutions and Others [2005] 1 All SA 105 (W). 25 In terms of section 172(2)(a) of the Constitution. 26 Sibiya v Director Public Prosecutions: Johannesburg High Court 2007 (1) SACR 347 (CC) In this regard, see Carmichele v Minister of Safety and Security 2001 (4) SA 938 (CC) 28 (2002) 2 SACR 105 (CC) 29 Act No. 9 of 2012 27 15