THE GAUTENG EDUCATION DEPARTMENT MISHANDLES YET ANOTHER "RACISM" DEBACLE AT PRETORIA HIGH SCHOOL FOR GIRLS
​
RICHARD WILKINSON
21 JULY 2024
​
This weekend, I received communication from the father of a student at Pretoria High School for Girls. He presented me with a letter which he had received from the school on Friday 19 July 2024 informing him that his daughter would be facing a disciplinary hearing for alleged serious misconduct and that, for a period of just over a week, she would be suspended from the school and demoted as a school prefect. I understand that 11 other girls are in a similar position.
The letter of suspension, which is signed by the school principal, Mrs PJ Erasmus, is very vague about what the girl is alleged to have done, stating simply that:
“Your daughter, [name redacted], was part of the WhatsApp group that allegedly expressed inappropriate opinions.”
No further details of the alleged wrongful conduct are provided, with the letter simply referring to the Learner Code of Conduct and the Social Media Policy. The letter informs the child’s father that his daughter will be suspended from school from 22 July to 30 July 2024 and that a formal disciplinary hearing will take place on 29 or 30 July 2024.
There are so many irregularities here that it is difficult to know where to begin.
The first and most glaring problem is the lack of specificity in the letter. Who is alleged to have said what, exactly? The letter does not say. It is impossible for an accused individual to respond to a charge when there is no properly formulated allegation.
The second problem relates to the standard that has allegedly been breached. The parents of the accused student are informed that “inappropriate opinions” were expressed by members of the WhatsApp group. What exactly is an “inappropriate opinion”? And on what grounds is expressing an “inappropriate opinion” unacceptable conduct?
Freedom of expression is a human right that is enshrined in the South African Bill of Rights. Section 16 of the South African Constitution provides as follows:
“(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of expression, which
includes–
(a) freedom of the press and other media;
(b) freedom to receive or impart information or ideas;
(c) freedom of artistic creativity; and
(d) academic freedom and freedom of scientific research.
(2) The right in subsection (1) does not extend to–
(a) propaganda for war;
(b) incitement of imminent violence; or
(c) advocacy of hatred that is based on race, ethnicity, gender or religion, and that constitutes incitement to cause harm.”
South Africa’s courts have repeatedly emphasised that the right to freedom of speech contained in section 16(1) of the Constitution should be interpreted broadly, whilst the restriction contained in section 16(2) should be exercised sparingly. A school which regards “inappropriate opinions” as being sanctionable conduct is a school that is acting in a manner that is completely unconstitutional. I have been provided with details of the conversation which took place in the WhatsApp group, apparently from quite a long time ago. Whilst the conversation concerns racial tensions at the school, from what I have seen there is nothing that can in any way be described as being “racist”.
The third problem is even more basic than the second problem, in that the letter does not allege that the girl in question even said anything in the group. It simply states that she was “part of the WhatsApp group that allegedly expressed inappropriate opinions.” How can a WhatsApp group express an opinion? And how can an institution take disciplinary action against someone when all they did was exist in a group? Since when are members of a WhatsApp group responsible for what other people in the group say?
Finally, it is not at all clear that the letter of suspension makes reference to relevant sections of the school’s Learner Code of Conduct or the Social Media Policy. The letter refers to “section 15.3.1.1.8” and “section 9.2.8.4” but neither the Learner Code of Conduct (updated to November 2023) nor the Social Media Policy (updated to May 2023) contain such sections.
What is particularly concerning (but, considering its track record, not at all surprising) has been the intervention of the Gauteng Education Department during this debacle. I have been informed by a number of parents that an official from the department appeared at Pretoria High School for Girls on Friday morning and made a series of highly inappropriate and inflammatory remarks at the school assembly. I am told that he stood up in front of the whole school and humiliated the accused individuals for their alleged acts of racism. He then asked the assembled students whether the accused girls should be suspended and expelled and whether the relevant school prefects should be removed from their positions. I understand that the students cheered their approval which was accompanied by loud whistling and ululations.
This is certainly not the first time that a South African provincial education department has mishandled alleged racism issues. In August 2019, a Pretoria teacher named Anneke Smit was accused of racism after she jokingly told her students that she felt she needed a “polisiemannejie” to maintain order in class (“polisiemannetjie” is the Afrikaans word for little policeman). Ludicrously, Ms Smit was accused of referring to a black policeman as being a “police monkey” and – unbelievably – she was found guilty of racism and was dismissed from her job.
According to media reports, “Ms Smit’s union, the SA Teachers’ Union, asked for audio recordings of the disciplinary hearing but never received them. She appealed her dismissal, and on 21 October 2021, she received a letter from [then] Gauteng Education MEC Panyaza Lesufi dismissing her appeal.”[1] Eventually, after a ten-month legal battle with the Gauteng Education Department in which she was assisted by lobby-group Solidarity, Ms Smit was cleared of any wrongdoing and was reinstated to her position.
Also in 2019, a teacher named Elana Barkhuizen shared a photograph via WhatsApp of her class of Grade R children at Laerskool Schweizer-Reneke. The photograph appeared to show a group of black children sitting at a separate table from white children. This prompted allegations of racial segregation and led to an outpouring of outrage on social media. Following an investigation which took four years to complete, the South African Human Rights Commission (“SAHRC”) found that the allegation of unfair discrimination against Mrs Barkhuizen was unfounded. The SAHRC also instructed the North West MEC of Education to apologise in writing to Mrs Barkhuizen for his predecessor’s conduct.[2] According to the SAHRC, former Education MEC Sello Lehari had put Mrs Barkhuizen’s life and the lives of her family members in danger after he publicly disclosed her identity, causing her to flee from her home.[3]
The Western Cape Education Department also suffered serious reputational damage in October 2022 after it mishandled a similar alleged racism incident at Fish Hoek High School. Western Cape Minister of Education David Maynier apologised to parents[4] for a “diversity and transformation” workshop held in the aftermath of the incident which was conducted by a radical and highly controversial consultant called Asanda Ngoasheng. However, the department has yet to release the report into the matter which it promised parents nearly two years ago.
The above incidents clearly indicate why disciplinary matters should be dealt with swiftly and discreetly, and with the privacy of accused individuals being carefully respected. The sort of grandstanding which I am told occurred on Friday at Pretoria High School for Girls is abhorrent, particularly when children are involved.
​
A long list of bullying, mistreatment and abuse
It is important that the allegations at Pretoria High School for Girls be properly investigated before people jump to conclusions, for there is now extensive evidence of a far larger and very troubling picture of abuse occurring in our schools. I have set out below just a few examples of this trend.
In most instances, sensational allegations of racism are eventually found to be baseless. This is exactly what happened at St Stithians Girls College in 2020, after a five-month investigation by the law firm Cheadle Thompson and Haysom Inc into 67 allegations of racism determined that “further investigations of these matters were unnecessary in light of the assessment of each complaint.”[5] At St Mary’s DSG in Pretoria, seven teachers were suspended from their positions only to be cleared months later.[6] I understand that similar racism investigations at Roedean in Johannesburg and St Anne’s College in KwaZulu Natal yielded very little of substance. This is not to say that the accused individuals were left unharmed by the process: I have dealt with dozens of teachers and parents of children who were left severely traumatised, with several individuals telling me that they experienced suicidal tendencies during this period.
In many instances, the outcomes of investigations have resulted in dismissal or expulsion and countless teachers and children have had their lives ruined. At St John’s College in 2017, a geography teacher called Keith Arlow was dismissed from his job after he was accused of making racist comments to students at the school. Mr Arlow’s dismissal followed a firestorm of controversy driven by students on social media which was amplified on 702 Radio by Eusebius McKaiser. The then Gauteng MEC for Education, Panyaza Lesufi, even visited St John’s College and demanded that Mr Arlow be fired by 1pm that day.[7]
What has not been well publicised is that Mr Arlow was subsequently cleared of all charges following a disciplinary hearing held by the South African Council of Education (“SACE”). I am in the process of obtaining full information relating to this matter, but it appears that the accuser’s version of events was completely contradicted and discredited by documentary evidence. St John’s College and the Gauteng Education Department have never properly acknowledged the outcome of the SACE inquiry or reflected on whether Mr Arlow may have been the victim of an appalling conspiracy and travesty of justice.
I have written about how school governing boards have used law firms to mistreat teachers and children at schools across South Africa. In August 2023, I published an essay entitled The Trouble with Roedean’s Woke “Anti-Discrimination” Policy [8] in which I explained why the school’s recognition of “microaggressions” as a form of racism is completely unacceptable. The term “microaggressions” – which is based upon the principles of Critical Race Theory – regards a long list of completely harmless interpersonal interactions as being racist. These include asking where someone is from or complimenting black children on performing well in class or promoting the ideas of colour-blindness, hard work and academic excellence.
In November 2023, I published an essay entitled The Woke Witch-Hunt at St Mary’s Waverley [9] in which I dissected the legal report produced by Thandi Orleyn and Zanele Masoek. Once again, the highly problematic concept of “microaggressions” featured prominently and was used by lawyers to justify the effective dismissal of two teachers from the school along with subjecting numerous other staff to humiliating corrective measures. The legal report failed to even disclose what the exact details of these “microaggressions” were.
People are even being policed for the clothing which they wear. In September 2023, I published an essay entitled Heritage Day and “Cultural Appropriation” at St John’s College [10] in which I revealed that the school’s Deputy Headmaster had warned students and staff to not commit “cultural appropriation” on Heritage Day. Cultural appropriation is another concept imported from the world of Critical Race Theory which is regularly used to target mainly white people for the crime of wearing clothing that originates in other cultures.
In light of all of the above, it is not difficult to understand why there is a clear risk that teachers and children at Pretoria High School for Girls might be being subjected to similar abuse.
​
Next steps
Going forward, there are two steps which must be taken without delay or obfuscation.
Firstly, the letters of suspension which were issued on Friday to twelve students at Pretoria High School for Girls are clearly legally and constitutionally incompetent. They are an embarrassment to the school and to the Gauteng Education Department and should be withdrawn forthwith. The accused students should be permitted to attend school without let or hindrance.
Sadly, it is difficult to see how this will happen. I have heard horrific accounts of how the accused children were bullied and victimised last week with some parents opting to not send their daughters to school on Friday out of concern for their safety. This is particularly concerning considering that Matric preliminary exams are due to start in a few weeks. I have also received video evidence clearly indicating that a coordinated attempt to bully white children at the school has been planned by other students at the school for months. Indeed, order appears to have completely collapsed at the school. Another video which I have received shows a horde of schoolgirls screaming abuse at Mrs Erasmus – the school principal – as she was walking across the school campus on Friday.
Secondly, Pretoria High School for Girls and the Gauteng Education Department must confirm the identity of the department official who appeared at the school on Friday and humiliated the accused individuals at a school assembly. This official must be subjected to swift and decisive disciplinary action. I have contacted Democratic Alliance Members of the Gauteng Provincial Legislature and have requested that they use every mechanism of oversight available to them to hold the provincial government accountable on this matter, including calling relevant school and department officials to testify before the Gauteng Provincial Legislature’s Portfolio Committee on Education.
It is abundantly clear to numerous people familiar with events that Mrs Erasmus is not the driving force behind the suspension letters, despite the letters being issued in her name. This then raises an important question: who is driving this controversy? If Mrs Erasmus or other officials at Pretoria High School for Girls are facing undue pressure from the Gauteng Education Department or if Mrs Erasmus is being forced to act upon unlawful directives dictated by officials within the department, then she should state this publicly.
Whatever the case, it needs to be made clear that the period during which this sort of mendacious bullying and abuse of teachers and children could occur without any accountability is rapidly coming to an end. At St Stithians Girls College, Dr Sally James and a number of senior school officials are currently facing a multi-million Rand lawsuit in their personal capacities after they disciplined a student who had been falsely accused of sending a WhatsApp message containing a derogatory term. There is a growing network of parents, teachers and lawyers who are more than ready to replicate this example wherever necessary.
And so I urge the Gauteng Education Department to tread very carefully going forward.
​
​
References
​
[4] https://www.politicsweb.co.za/documents/fish-hoek-high-this-should-never-have-happened--da
[5] https://www.school-capture.com/lovelynandeusebius
[6] https://www.politicsweb.co.za/opinion/how-to-ruin-a-school
[8] https://www.school-capture.com/roedean-anti-discrimination
[9] https://www.school-capture.com/waverley-witch-hunt
[10] https://www.school-capture.com/sjc-cultural-appropriation