The nature of association and dissociation for common purpose liability

Abstract

Since the pre-requisites for common-purpose liability where there was no prior agreement were laid down in S V Mgedezi 1989 (1) SA 687 (A), the appellate division has moved to resolve related controversial issues. These include the question whether a joiner-in is a perpetrator or accomplice, and whether he should be convicted of murder or attempted murder.

It is the question of dissociation which has remained elusive. Courts accept that a person should only be criminally liable when his dissociation from a common purpose takes place after the commencement of execution stage is reached. My submission is that whether one dissociates himself should be a question of fact, to be determined according to the circumstances of each case. Such determination should pay close attention to the doctrine of proximity. Where a person played a minor role, or acted under the influence of a dominant partner, this should be reflected in the punishment imposed.