The SA Democratic Teachers Union and 16 of the affected schools had asked that Grant’s decision be reviewed and set aside.
|||Cape town - It is not adequate to give one-word reasons or simple sentences as a reason for a school’s closure.
This was the argument put forward by advocate Thabani Masuku on behalf of Basic Education Minister Angie Motshekga in the Western Cape High Court on Tuesday.
There should be a certain “level of engagement” between the MEC and the community surrounding the school and the process to close schools should include more than just mechanical recordings of meetings, he said.
A full Bench of judges - Andre le Grange, Lee Bozalek and Nape Dolamo - are hearing a review of Education MEC Donald Grant’s decision to close 20 of the 27 schools which had been identified for possible closure last year.
The SA Democratic Teachers Union and 16 of the affected schools had asked that Grant’s decision be reviewed and set aside.
They attacked the constitutional validity of Section 33 of the Schools Act, the legislation which underpinned the way in which an MEC could go about closing schools, because it did not require Grant to “follow a fair, lawful and constitutional procedure, and it was also vague and overbroad”.
An important question in the review was whether the department had fulfilled its requirements to hold public hearings and allow communities to make representations.
Masuku likened school closures to the “death penalty”, describing it as “snuffing the life out of a school” so that it “ceases to exist”. “Section 33 intends to include more than just a mechanical recording of representations and then a decision.” He said because a school was often a source of pride and history in its community, its closure should be dealt with sensitively.
“In this litigation between the applicants and the provincial authorities, Section 33 must not be the casualty of the litigation. The MEC must have the power to close schools.
“The question is, under which circumstances?
“It is a power that should be used to advance the rights in the Bill of Rights.”
Masuku said it was required of the MEC to engage with those affected by the closure.
“There is a duty of the decisionmaker to act transparently, accountably and responsibly.
“It is not a mechanical engagement where the MEC looks at reports which have been prepared.”
He said without talking to people personally, and looking at their faces, the MEC would not be able to make an informed decision and would not be able to convince community members that the school’s closure was in their best interests.
Masuku said there was no doubt that Section 33 was constitutional.
A majority judgment last year found that the procedure had fallen short of what was expected in a public consultation process, while a minority judgment had found that the act distinguished between representations and a process of consultation.
Judgment was reserved.
michelle.jones@inl.co.za
Cape Times