A textbook case of the state’s failure to honour its pledges
In spite of promising basic education for all, a court will have to remind the government there are no ifs and buts in its solemn vows to the citizens of SA, writes Mark Heywood
IN the mid-19th century, as mission schools began to spread across different regions of conquered South Africa, the first generations of African students came to attach special importance to books and to literature more generally.
In the late 19th century, one Lovedale College student wrote assertively that “books made the white man’s success and they shall make ours”.
In the years that followed, access to books and the learning they impart was considered critical to liberation. Intellectuals and activists literally seized upon them. SEK Mqhayi, Tiyo Soga, Sol Plaatje, AC Jordan (the father of Pallo), Priscilla Ntantala, Govan Mbeki (the father of Thabo, named after William Govan, the first principal of Lovedale), OR Tambo, Nelson Mandela and Chris Hani all seized on books and learning as a catapult towards freedom. Hani even wrote once that “it helps me to be decisive when I read Hamlet”.
This was not surprising. Colonialism was premised on racist ideas about the supremacy of Western civilisation — a notion black intellectuals rejected without rejecting its learning. Bantu education was premised on the deprivation of knowledge and access to learning through books.
When, in 1976, students rose up against Bantu education, the spark for that struggle was the threat of their being taught in a language that was not the language of books and literature. To them, Afrikaans was a bastard language, a language intended to disable and demean.
Not surprisingly, therefore, when we won our freedom, the democratic constitution rang out with a promise: “Everyone shall have a right to a basic education, including adult basic education.” There were no ifs or buts about it, no reference to “progressive realisation” or according to “available resources”.
Education is either good or bad. After 350 years of discriminatory and bad education it was time to tip the tables.
An equal education is what was promised. Access to education has been described by the United Nations Committee on Economic, Cultural and Social Rights as: “An empowerment right . . . the primary vehicle by which economically and socially marginalised adults and children can lift themselves out of poverty and obtain the means to participate fully in their communities. Education has a vital role in empowering women, safeguarding children from exploitative and hazardous labour and sexual exploitation, promoting human rights and democracy, protecting the environment, and controlling population growth. Increasingly, education is recognised as one of the best financial investments states can make. But the importance of education is not just practical: a welleducated, enlightened and active mind, able to wander freely and widely, is one of the joys and rewards of human existence.”
So who would have imagined that the liberation government would neglect education? Yet neglect it, it has. Never mind books for a minute; many schools don’t have desks, chairs, sufficient teachers, toilets, even electricity.
In Limpopo, 90% of schools do not meet safety standards. It’s a national shame.
This week, when I walked through a famous school and spoke to 10 classes of Grade 10 students, most of the young faces were blank and resigned. Asking questions about why textbooks are important solicited little enthusiasm.
The vice-principal told me that there is no culture of reading among the youth. Are we surprised? Education is failing children rather than children failing education.
If we can get books into schools we will still need to have a national discussion about how to re-establish a culture of learning.
This is the context in which on Tuesday one of the most important test cases of the meaning of the constitution’s provision on basic education will be heard by the Supreme Court of Appeal.
The case stems from the infamous “Limpopo textbooks saga” — a wound that continued to fester untended once it faded from the media. The case has been brought by Basic Education For All, an organisation in Limpopo that teachers, parents and principals have set up to assert their rights.
So, before five wise judges, the government will appeal against an order that the organisation obtained last year from Judge Neil Tuchten.
The order was made when Basic Education For All and Section27 went to court for the fourth time in two years, demanding textbooks. Tuchten said: “Books are the essential tools, even weapons, of free people. That is why tyrants throughout the ages have sought to restrict and even deny the access of their subjects to the written word and even to burn and otherwise destroy the books of those whose cultures and ideas they seek to suppress.”
He then gave an order premised on the right “of each learner to his or her own textbook for each subject of study, on time at the start of the school year”.
This is the standard that government ministers demand of the private schools their children and grandchildren go to. But for the public system they preside over, their argument before the court is that “it is an impossible standard of perfection” to meet. They want the court to require only that they take “reasonable” measures.
Reasonable means showing that you made an effort — even if you didn’t succeed. Reasonable means having a plan — even if you don’t implement it. Reasonable means accepting failure.
The case next week really should be a tipping point in public rejection of the government’s contemptuous attitude to the education of our children. It is not necessarily the fault of the MECs of basic education or even of the minister, some of whom work extremely hard, but of the whole government and ultimately the president.
We should point angry fingers at a government that has given up on the majority of our children before they even had a chance to prove themselves. And we should hope that our courts will continue to remind the government of its constitutional duty.
Heywood is director of Section27. Follow the case on Twitter #TextbooksMatter and like Basic Education for All on Facebook and Twitter
‘Everyone shall have a right to a basic education, including adult basic education.’ There were no ifs or buts about it