The powers of the court on review are as follows:[376]

The maximum amounts which regional courts and magistrate's courts may award are laid down from time to time by the Minister of Justice. These awards have the effect of civil judgments. The person in whose favour an award is made may within sixty days renounce it. If he does not, that person will be precluded from proceeding civilly in connection with the same injury.

The question has arisen, in terms of section 35(3)(h) of the Constitution, of whether or not section 115 is constitutional.

The twenty-year prescription period may be interrupted only by the service of documents, such as summons. If, therefore, an accused is able to evade the law for twenty years, he will have gotten away with it.

If the accused had been the primary agent of delay, he should not be able to rely on it in vindicating his rights under section 25(3)(a): for example where he had sought postponements or delayed the prosecution in ways that were less formal.

Even when the sentence exceeds the limit, there is no automatic review if the accused had a legal adviser.[368]

The delay could not be ascribed, however, to a particular person or instance; it was due to a combination of factors, including the practice of continuing rolls, the overcrowding of rolls, the fact that certain matters had not been completed during the previous court term, the fact that certain prosecutors were unable to take on new matters, and the priority to be given to matters which were age-related, or where the accused were in custody.

Section 3 provides that the police official who receives such information has a duty to investigate. If the body is available, it must be examined by a doctor, usually at a post-mortem examination.

The situation prior to the commencement of section 105A of the CPA is illustrated in S v Blank, North Western Dense Concrete CC v Director of Public Prosecutions, Western Cape and Van Eeden v Director of Public Prosecutions (Cape). The basic problem was that the accused was not sure whether the court would go along with the State's attitude as to sentence.

Certain of these grounds are also part of the common law.[77] In S v Hudson,[78] it was held that the likely heavy sentence in the event of conviction is also a factor, as is the foreign nationality of accused, while S v Lulane[79] the matter of the strength of the state's case was also invoked.

When an appeal against a conviction or sentence or order of a lower court is noted, this does not automatically suspend the operation of the sentence unless the court releases the convicted person on bail.[120] If the convicted person was out on bail for trial, the court granting bail pending appeal (or review) may extend bail, in the same amount or in any other amount.[121]

Further conditions may be added subsequently on application by the prosecutor.[104] This provision also gives a useful list of the types of conditions that may be imposed at the outset. The court has the power to increase or reduce the amount of bail, or to amend or supplement any condition, on application by the prosecutor or the accused.[105]

Where an act or omission constitutes an offence under two or more statutory provisions or is an offence against a statutory provision and the common law, the person guilty of such act or omission shall, unless the contrary intention appears, be liable to be prosecuted and punished under either the statutory provision or, as the case may be, under the statutory provision or the common law, but shall not be liable to more than one punishment for the act or omission constituting the offence.[495]

In Broome v DPP, Western Cape, Broome was charged in the magistrate's court with fraud and contraventions of three statutes, due to offences committed from 1986 to 1994. Broome was a partner in charge of the audit by a firm of accountants of the OWT Group, and a director of the OWT Group.

If there is no discharge at end of the state case, the defence presents its case. It may deliver an opening address,[280] if it desires, and then call the accused and any witnesses it chooses. The state cross-examines these witnesses, and the defence may re-examine them. The accused is usually obliged to testify before defence witnesses.[281]

For example, raising 4 to the power of 9 modulo 7 can be calculated in the following way:     49 mod 7:     42 mod 7 = 16 mod 7 = 2     44 mod 7 = 22 mod 7 = 4 mod 7 = 4     48 mod 7 = 42 mod 7 = 16 mod 7 = 2     49 mod 7 = (41 mod 7 * 48 mod 7) mod 7 = 4 * 2 mod 7 = 1

The critical question was whether the lapse of time was reasonable, taking into consideration the nature of the prejudice suffered, the nature of the case, and the systematic delay.

The court noted that the State is entitled to resist a claim by the accused for access to any particular document in the police docket

As to the constitutionality of the provisions in section 60, sections 60(4) to 60(9), 60(11)(a), 60(11B)(c) and 60(14) were held to be constitutional in S v Dlamini.

Male inhabitants of South Africa, between the ages of sixteen and sixty, are obliged to assist with the arrest if called upon to do so by a police official.[16] Failure to comply with such a request without lawful cause attracts criminal liability.

The regional court refused the application, holding that the critical question was how our courts determined whether a particular lapse of time was reasonable or unreasonable, and what the appropriate remedy was. In determining this question, the courts have adopted the "balancing test," as decided in various decisions, in which the conduct of both the prosecution and the accused were weighed and the following considerations examined:

The relevant parts of POCA are Chapters 5 and 6. There are definitions in section 1 for the entire Act, as well as in section 12 for the purposes of Chapter 5.

In terms of section 5, however, if no prosecution is to be instituted, the prosecutor submits the statements to magistrate of the district.[527]

To protect against the use of the algorithm for encrypting too small plaintext numbers, one should add random paddings, that would increase the number values. Also, thanks to using random paddings, the same plaintext numbers are encoded by various ciphertext numbers. There are a lot of popular padding schemes, for example OAEP, PKCS#1 or RSA-PSS.

Does order matter for RSA when used multiple times

The problem with these tests is that they are theoretically helpful but are difficult to apply.

Prosecutors and presiding officers are constitutionally bound, therefore, to prevent infringement of the right to a speedy trial. Where such infringement does occur, or where it appears imminent, there is a duty to devise and implement an appropriate remedy or combination of remedies. What such remedy or remedies ought to be must be left to be determined in the light of the circumstances of each particular case.

This issue was comprehensively addressed by section 105A of CPA, which introduced detailed procedures for plea and sentence agreements. The procedures may be divided into five stages:

Appeals and applications for leave to appeal must be noted and followed up within the times and other requirements of the legislation and the rules of court.[337][338][339]

In terms of section 37(2)(b), a medical practitioner attached to a hospital may take a blood sample of a person admitted to the hospital if he is of the reasonable opinion that such a sample may be relevant at later criminal proceedings. In cases where the police, etc., are not authorised to act under subsections (1) or (2), the court before which criminal proceedings are pending may order the same steps.[148]

The record of bail proceedings forms part of the trial record.[96] The court has a duty to warn the accused that anything said by him in evidence during bail proceedings may be used in evidence against him at trial. Bail proceedings are to be recorded in full.[97]

The impeachment of witnesses is dealt with in section 190. For the meaning of "hostile witness," and the effect of a declaration of witness as hostile, see, for example, Meyers Trustee v Malan[298] and City Panel Beaters v Bana.[299]

Section 51 sets out the objects of diversion, which are to

Next the prosecutor informs the court of the agreement.[514] The court asks the accused to confirm that the agreement has been entered into. The court must satisfy itself on certain procedural requirements, as to consultation with the investigating officer and the opportunity of the complainant to make representations. The prosecutor and the accused will have an opportunity to correct any defects if the court is not satisfied.

In terms of section 59 of the CPA, a police official of the rank of sergeant or higher may fix bail before the first court appearance if the offence for which the accused is in custody does not fall under Part II or Part III of a Schedule 2 offence: that is to say, where the offence is generally of a less serious nature.

RSA can be used multiple times (with different keys) to encrypt a message. The received ciphertext can be decrypted in any order. The result is always the same. It does not matter in which order the operations have been performed. However, one shouldn't encrypt a message in this way more than twice, because of attacks based on the Chinese remainder theorem.

A court which convicts or acquits an accused shall declare any article which is forged or counterfeit, or which cannot lawfully be possessed by any person, to be forfeited to the State.[469]

The person making an arrest may search the arrested person without a warrant.[450]

POCA is a wide-ranging measure aimed at cracking down on organised crime. It creates offences related to racketeering activities, money laundering, assisting another to benefit from proceeds of organised crime, failure to report suspicious activities, and gang-related activities. It also has wide-ranging provisions for forfeiture of assets.

The court expressed a need for circumspection, however, in relying on foreign precedent. The South African society and criminal justice system differed from those in other jurisdictions. The test for establishing whether the time lapse was reasonable should not be unduly stratified or preordained, as it was not helpful for the court to impose semi-formal time constraints on the prosecuting authority: That was law-making function, which it would be inappropriate for the court to exercise.

Basically, my question is : Is the code below correct ?