12 March 2026
Statement: Equal Education Law Centre enters Swartruggens school dispute as friend of the court to ensure learner and parent voices are heard
Today, 12 March 2026, the Equal Education Law Centre (EELC) returns to the North West High Court as a friend of the court in an urgent case in which a School Governing Body (SGB) is challenging the placement of 78 English-medium learners at their school – Swartruggens Gekombineerde Skool (“the school”). Earlier in the proceedings, having heard the EELC’s concerns regarding the failure to properly include the learners in the case, the Court directed the EELC to go to the school to consult directly with the affected learners and caregivers, because their views were absent from a case that was entirely about them. Children have a right to be heard in all matters that affect them. We are in court to ensure that right is honoured.
Background to the case
The SGB has taken the North West Department of Education (NWDoE) to court to challenge its decision to place 78 English-medium Grade 8 to 10 learners at the school. The SGB argues that the NWDoE acted unlawfully by placing them at the school because it violated the school’s admissions and language policies, exceeded its capacity, and failed to consult the school properly. The SGB wants these learners moved to Swartruggens Intermediate School instead. Swartruggens Intermediate no longer offers high school grades and is now exclusively a primary school.
The case is playing out against the backdrop of the newly enacted Basic Education Laws Amendment (BELA) Act, which came into force on 24 December 2024 and reshaped how decisions about school admissions and language policies are made. The BELA Act clarifies and expands the authority of provincial education departments in learner placement decisions while preserving important consultative roles for school governing bodies. The case is therefore one of the first cases to test how these new provisions apply in practice.
EELC’s intervention in the matter
The EELC entered the case as a friend of the court with one central concern: the learners and caregivers most affected by this dispute had not been given a proper opportunity to be heard, and therefore the Court did not have sufficient and reliable evidence before it to make a decision. These learners have a constitutional right to be heard in matters that directly affect their schooling and future.
The SGB’s court application directly names the affected learners and caregivers as parties, meaning they have a legal right to be informed of the proceedings and to respond. Yet many only learned that the court case was happening at all when the EELC reached out to them during our consultation process. The school’s legal team argued that proper service had been fulfilled by posting a notice on the school noticeboard.
In cases involving children, courts are required to apply heightened procedural safeguards to protect their best interests. The EELC therefore submits that there is no valid justification for the failure to ensure proper and effective service on the affected families.
Court-ordered EELC engagement with learners and caregivers
Having heard and agreed with the EELC’s concerns, the Court granted the EELC leave to engage with affected learners and their caregivers, including the 78 learners placed by the NWDoE.
The EELC team visited the school on 27 and 28 February 2026, meeting with caregivers and learners. Their experiences, perspectives, and concerns were captured and placed in a supplementary affidavit and a report, which we filed with the Court on 6 March. Our hope is that when a decision is made, it reflects the full reality of what is at stake for the affected learners and their families, and most importantly, that it takes their voices into account.
Expectations for the hearing
At today’s hearing, the EELC will make submissions based on the information gathered from learners and caregivers and will ask the Court to ensure that any decision in this matter is guided by the best interests of the learners and by the constitutional right to basic education.
This case highlights the importance of making school admissions and learner placement decisions transparently, based on evidence, and with meaningful consideration of the children most directly affected. The EELC hopes that the Court’s decision will protect the rights, dignity, and educational stability of all affected learners, and that they are given a meaningful opportunity to be heard before any final decision is made about their schooling.
At the heart of this case are children whose education and future opportunities depend on the outcome. Their best interests must remain the central consideration in resolving this dispute.
[END]
To arrange media interviews, contact:
Papama Mabotshwa | Media and Communications Intern | papama@eelawcentre.org.za or 062 520 1818
