Providing Greater Clarity on the Meaning of Basic Education [Discussion of Moko V Acting Principal, Malusi Secondary School 2021 3 SA 323 (CC)]

G. Adams, BV Slade
{"title":"Providing Greater Clarity on the Meaning of Basic Education [Discussion of Moko V Acting Principal, Malusi Secondary School 2021 3 SA 323 (CC)]","authors":"G. Adams, BV Slade","doi":"10.47348/slr/2022/i3a12","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Section 29(1)(a) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 provides everyone with the right to a basic education. However, the exact meaning of a “basic education” as protected in this section has been rather uncertain as it is not defined in the Constitution or any legislative document. In Governing Body of the Juma Musjid Primary School v Essay 2011 8 BCLR 761 (CC), the Constitutional Court accepted that basic education includes, at a minimum, schooling from grades 1 to 9. In AB v Pridwin Preparatory School 2020 5 SA 327 (CC), Nicholls JA held that an educational institution which does not offer secondary or tertiary education, provides those attending the institution with a basic education. Several policy documents refer to basic education as the General Education and Training phase of schooling, which consists of schooling from grades 1 to 9. Given the uncertainty surrounding the exact ambit of a basic education, both in case law and legislation, the Constitutional Court in Moko v Acting Principal of Malusi Secondary School 2021 3 SA 323 (CC) had to answer the question “where does basic education end and further education begin?” The court’s decision provides clarity on the meaning of a basic education as protected in section 29(1)(a). This decision is to be welcomed given the importance of the right as a direct and unqualified right, and for its transformative potential. However, there is now a misalignment between the understanding of a basic education protected in section 29(1)(a) and several policy documents issued by the Department of Basic Education. This misalignment may lead to further confusion regarding the meaning of the right to a basic education and potentially negatively impact the realisation or fulfilment of the right. This note will consider the court’s decision, particularly in relation to its finding to the question posed above.","PeriodicalId":325707,"journal":{"name":"Stellenbosch Law Review","volume":"66 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Stellenbosch Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47348/slr/2022/i3a12","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Section 29(1)(a) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 provides everyone with the right to a basic education. However, the exact meaning of a “basic education” as protected in this section has been rather uncertain as it is not defined in the Constitution or any legislative document. In Governing Body of the Juma Musjid Primary School v Essay 2011 8 BCLR 761 (CC), the Constitutional Court accepted that basic education includes, at a minimum, schooling from grades 1 to 9. In AB v Pridwin Preparatory School 2020 5 SA 327 (CC), Nicholls JA held that an educational institution which does not offer secondary or tertiary education, provides those attending the institution with a basic education. Several policy documents refer to basic education as the General Education and Training phase of schooling, which consists of schooling from grades 1 to 9. Given the uncertainty surrounding the exact ambit of a basic education, both in case law and legislation, the Constitutional Court in Moko v Acting Principal of Malusi Secondary School 2021 3 SA 323 (CC) had to answer the question “where does basic education end and further education begin?” The court’s decision provides clarity on the meaning of a basic education as protected in section 29(1)(a). This decision is to be welcomed given the importance of the right as a direct and unqualified right, and for its transformative potential. However, there is now a misalignment between the understanding of a basic education protected in section 29(1)(a) and several policy documents issued by the Department of Basic Education. This misalignment may lead to further confusion regarding the meaning of the right to a basic education and potentially negatively impact the realisation or fulfilment of the right. This note will consider the court’s decision, particularly in relation to its finding to the question posed above.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
厘清基础教育的意义[讨论Moko V代理校长,marusi中学2021 3 SA 323 (CC)]
1996年《南非共和国宪法》第29(1)(a)条规定人人享有接受基础教育的权利。然而,本节所保护的“基础教育”的确切含义相当不确定,因为《宪法》或任何立法文件都没有对其下定义。在Juma Musjid小学管理机构诉2011年8 BCLR 761 (CC)案中,宪法法院承认基础教育至少包括一年级至九年级的学校教育。在AB诉Pridwin Preparatory School 2020 5 SA 327 (CC)一案中,Nicholls JA认为,不提供中等或高等教育的教育机构为就读该机构的学生提供基础教育。一些政策文件将基础教育称为学校教育的通识教育和培训阶段,包括从一年级到九年级的学校教育。鉴于基础教育的确切范围在判例法和立法方面都存在不确定性,宪法法院在Moko诉Malusi Secondary School代理校长2021年3 SA 323 (CC)一案中必须回答“基础教育在哪里结束,继续教育在哪里开始?”法院的裁决明确了第29(1)(a)条所保护的基础教育的含义。鉴于这项权利作为一项直接和无条件的权利的重要性及其变革潜力,这项决定将受到欢迎。然而,现在对第29(1)(a)条所保护的基础教育的理解与基础教育部发布的几份政策文件之间存在不一致。这种错位可能导致对基础教育权含义的进一步混淆,并可能对该权利的实现或实现产生负面影响。本说明将审议法院的裁决,特别是与法院对上述问题的裁决有关的裁决。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Providing Greater Clarity on the Meaning of Basic Education [Discussion of Moko V Acting Principal, Malusi Secondary School 2021 3 SA 323 (CC)] The best interests of the child in the face of COVID-19 travel restrictions: Analysing the rights of children and parents [Discussion of CD v Department of Social Development (5570/2020) [2020] ZAWCHC 25 (14 April 2020)] The Protection of the Environmental Rights and Interests of Children: A South African Perspective The Legal Combatting of B-BBEE Fronting Practices in South Africa – Past and Present King NNO V De Jager 2021 4 SA 1 (CC): Three Perspectives
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1