DA launches court action to compel full-time schooling

The regulations which prevent some children from attending school every day of the week are unconstitutional as they unjustifiably limit the rights to basic education, a child’s best interest and equality.

The DA made this submission in an application filed before the high court in Pretoria on Wednesday in which it seeks to compel schools to open fully, immediately.

The party said more than 80% of South African schools are still operating on a rotational basis, whereby each child attends school half the time, on alternate days or weeks.

The DA said about 80% of schoolchildren were being denied half their schooling, on the assumption that this is somehow beneficial to them.

The application is in two parts, with part A set to be heard urgently on February 8.

In part A, the DA asks the court to declare that, until determination of part B of the application, primary and high schools must continue to enforce social distancing to the best of their abilities, without reducing the number of pupils they teach, or altering school days and hours.

In part B, the DA wants the court to review and set aside regulations that make it impossible for primary schools to fulfil the right to a basic education.

The regulations the party is challenging are that a primary school cannot return to traditional attendance if that school cannot guarantee that pupils can remain 1m apart, and in the case of high schools, 1.5m apart.

In an affidavit filed before the court on Wednesday, DA federal leader John Steenhuisen said the question in the application was whether all children should receive the basic education guaranteed in the constitution.

“At present, children at richer primary schools can go to school every day. Children attending poorer primary schools can only go to school every second day, or second week.

“This is a clear violation and infringement of children’s constitutional rights. It will stunt their learning, perhaps permanently,” he said.

Steenhuisen said the reason given for social distancing in schools was that it was designed to stop the spread of Covid-19.

He said stopping children going to school would not achieve that goal.

“Allowing children to return to school will not significantly, or at all, increase the risk of spreading Covid-19. There are other ways to prevent the spread of Covid-19 without stopping children from learning.”

He said the violation of children’s rights was disproportionate to achieving any possible limitation of the spread of Covid-19.

“The majority of all primary schools cannot allow all learners to attend while complying with the 1m rule.”

He said this was true of the requirements for high schools, to a greater extent.

Steenhuisen said the regulations were unconstitutional as they denied children half the time they would otherwise have at school.

He said expert evidence shows absence from school has real and long-lasting effects on children’s education and development.

He said the government’s own ministerial advisory committee recommended in July last year that any limited benefit of reducing schooling was unjustified.

Steenhuisen said expert evidence established the very serious negative effects of denying children access to school.

“Unsurprisingly, preventing children from attending school reduces their ability to learn in both the short and long term. It also has severe negative mental health effects on children.”

TimesLIVE