Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
13 December 2024 Photo Supplied
Dr Solomon Chibaya
Dr Solomon Chibaya, lecturer in the Department of Education Management, Policy, and Comparative Education, University of the Free State.

Opinion article by Dr Solomon Chibaya, lecturer in the Department of Education Management, Policy, and Comparative Education, University of the Free State.


Friday 13 December 2024 marks a crucial moment in South African education law. All stakeholders are awaiting the decision regarding implementation of the contentious sections 4 and 5 of the Basic Education Amendment Bill. After President Cyril Ramaphosa signed the Bill into law, he delayed implementation of the sections on language and admission policies for three months. This was meant to allow for consultation on proposals for resolving the conflicts around the contested sections.

The main issue around the language and admission policies is that the Bela Act allows the provincial heads of departments to have the final say on these policies after the school governing bodies (SGBs) have developed them. Some SGBs see this as their powers being usurped, which contradicts the democratisation of school governance. However, cases in which the powers of SGBs have been abused in ways that led to exclusionary language and admission policies presents the need for oversight of these critical school policies.

Friday 13 December 2024 is the deadline for the resolution.

One cannot avoid thinking about the implications of the different possible outcomes of the decision beyond 13 December. The president could approve the Act without any changes, or clauses 4 and 5 could be returned to the National Assembly for reworking.

If approved

If the Act is to be approved with the two contentious clauses in their current form, there will be a barrage of court cases from opponents of the decision. Over the past few months preceding the signing of the Bela Bill and after it was signed on 13 September 2024, the DA, AfriForum and other lobby groups have promised to take the matter to court. In such a scenario, all parties must prepare themselves for long, vicious and contentious court battles that have enormous implications for the political context defined by the Government of National Unity (GNU).

What will add further fuel to the fire is that at the helm of the department in which the Act is being debated is a DA minister, Minister Siviwe Gwarube. Will she toe the line and follow the law as expected by her office? Or will she follow the direction of her political party, which has been clear about how much it abhors the Act, especially in relation to its current form? She could find herself in the firing line.

If approved in its current form, beyond 13 December 2024, the Act will appease proponents who have been clear about their support for it. Proponents of the Bela Act, such as the ANC (which has been campaigning for it to be embraced by all), SADTU (which on countless matches in support of the Act and have even threatened the president with litigation if they do not get their way), and other political parties like the EFF and the MK Party will be vilified. Considering this, the country’s polarisation is apparent and is a potential and real threat to the GNU/coalition.

If sent back

The DA, AfriForum, and other lobby groups, especially those who want clauses 4 and 5 overhauled, will celebrate, but only for a moment. At least they can battle against the Act’s current form in the National Assembly. Rather than the rigour and expenses surrounding litigation, the different sides must now use their different lawmakers to make a case for them.

The results from the last votes on the BELAB held on 16 May 2024 showed that 223 votes were in favour of and 78 votes against the bill. If these results are anything to go by, there is little change the National Assembly would make to the Act. It will boil down to votes, and the scale will be lopsided. We will be heading for litigation and threats.

At the centre of this is the child whose best interest we are supposed to looking out for. Beyond Friday 13 December 2024, our focus will move away from the child to the National Assembly, the courtrooms, the never-say-no law firms. All eyes will be on the political space. 

News Archive

The mysterious origins and problematic significance of the Postamble
2014-10-20



Prof André du Toit (UCT) and Prof Pieter Duvenhage (UFS)
Emeritus professor from UCT’s Department of Political Studies, Prof André du Toit, delivered a presentation at the Bloemfontein Campus on 14, 15 and 16 October 2014 respectively. His presentations gave an in-depth exploration of the Postamble as founding text of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC).

This event was hosted by the Institute for Reconciliation and Social Justice, in collaboration with the Department of Philosophy.

Prof Du Toit’s papers were entitled:
•    A Need for Truth: Amnesty and the Origins and Consequences of the TRC Process.
•    Tracking down a belated and inconclusive amnesty pact: The obscure origins and problematic significance of the 'Postamble' as founding text of the TRC process (Part 1 and 2).

In his presentations he explored how the text of the Postamble came to be written. He also scrutinised the respective contributions of those who were involved in drafting the text. The significance of the Postamble – as it is understood in its historical context – was also a point of discussion.

Prof Du Toit raised some thought-provoking questions during the three days. What is the relation of the amnesty provision of the Postamble with the subsequent TRC amnesty process? How did a text without any particular reference to a truth commission come to function as founding text and discursive framework for the TRC?

He also investigated some of the main problems with the history and significance of the Postamble, as well as its mysterious origins. In addition, Prof Du Toit conducted a critical analysis of a set of newly-identified drafts of the text.

One of Prof Du Toit’s most substantive inquiries, though, was into the question: Was the amnesty provision of the Postamble the product of an underlying amnesty ‘pact’ between the NP government and the ANC?


We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept