Section 27 is heading to the Supreme Court of appeal on the 26th of February 2024, against a High Court’s judgment which they feel was not harsh enough after two learners experienced corporal punishment from their teachers in separate incidents.
According to Section 27 – which is public interest law centre which advocates for access to basic education – a learner from Limpopo who was in Grade 5 and 10 years old in 2019, was hit by a teacher on her cheek and head. After this incident, she experienced a lasting bleed from her ears which required her to visit several doctors, resulting in her absenteeism from school and her needing to repeat the grade. In 2015, a Gauteng learner who was in Grade 2 and 7 years old then, was hit on the back of his head with a PVC pipe by his teacher.
The two separate cases were handled by the South African Council for Educators (SACE) for both teachers and in September of 2019, the teachers pleaded guilty at a hearing. They were both fined R15 000 each, of which R5 000 was suspended. Section 27 argues that this was a lenient sanction from SACE because as much as it included striking the names of both teachers off the educator’s roll, it was suspended for 10 years.
“This means that these teachers are still teaching in the classrooms with no consideration for learners’ safety and no obligation on the teachers to correct their behaviour,” a statement by Section 27 said.
According to a 2019 Statistic South Africa report, over 1 million of 13 million school-going children aged 5 to 17 years, reported that they had experienced some form of violence at school. The report shows that of those who experienced violence at school, close to 84% experienced corporal punishment by teachers, followed by verbal abuse (13,7%) and physical violence by teachers (10,6%).
Section 27 wants the High Court’s judgment in the Supreme Court of Appeal to ensure that the two educators are subjected to fresh hearings.
“We argue that SACE failed to adopt a child-centred approach in its decision-making as the children and their parents were not consulted during SACE’s disciplinary proceedings, nor were they given an opportunity to make representations or give evidence concerning appropriate sanctions at any time during the disciplinary process,” Section27 reported.
*SACE was contacted for comment, but none was given at the time of publishing the story.