[70] In S v Maseti Conradie J observed that the view that whipping should be imposed as a device to keep juveniles out of prison was fallacious:
"… [r]egsbeamptes laat jong mans slaan omdat daar met ons beperkte middele, infrastrukture en vonnisopsies, net geen ander raad met hulle is nie … Maar dat die veroorsaking van pyn en leed 'n onbevredigende vonnisopsie is, weet ons algar lankal."[1]
Noting that new sentencing options had been introduced into the criminal justice system, he voiced the hope that they would be creatively and effectively used.[2]
[71] Juvenile whipping, however, has not invariably met with judicial disapproval. In S v Vakalisa,[3] Mitchell J referred to remarks in S v V en 'n Ander[4] in which MT Steyn JA dealt at length with the undesirability of corporal punishment and described it as "extremely humiliating and physically painful." Mitchell J went on to observe:
"Whatever may be the South African view of this kind of punishment [juvenile whipping], the Transkeian lawgiver has taken a different view of the desirability of corporal punishment in respect of juveniles even, as I have mentioned, specifically providing for the whipping of female juveniles, a sentence which is frequently applied in various magisterial districts of Transkei. I would have thought that it is far more important to keep juveniles out of gaol where the appropriate circumstances exist, to save them the association with adult convicted criminals, than to shy away from the imposition of a 'juvenile whipping'. This is particularly true in Transkei when, if a juvenile
