19 February 2026
Statement: The Equal Education Law Centre intervenes to defend learners’ Constitutional right to education in Swartruggens Gekombineerde Skool admission dispute
Today, 19 February 2026, the Equal Education Law Centre will be making legal submissions in the North West High Court, in Mmabatho, as amicus curiae (friend of the court) in an urgent matter between Swartruggens Gekombineerde Skool and Others and Head of Department, North West Department of Education & Others, concerning the placement of 78 learners at Swartruggens Gekombineerde Skool (“the Swartruggens matter”). The matter is being heard virtually
Background to the case
This case challenges the North West Department of Education’s decision to place 78 learners at Swartruggens Gekombineerde Skool (the “school”). The school and its governing body (SGB) have brought an application arguing that the Department acted unlawfully by placing the learners in the school against the school’s admissions and language policies, and beyond the school’s determined capacity. They argue that this decision interfered with their SGB’s legal powers, was taken without proper consultation, and risks undermining educational quality, safety, and available resources. The school seek an order directing that these learners be placed instead at Swartruggens Intermediate School.
The case arises in the context of the recent implementation of the Basic Education Laws Amendment Act (BELA), which came into force on 24 December 2024 and significantly reshaped the legal framework governing school admissions and language policies. The amendments clarify and expand the authority of provincial education departments in learner placement decisions, while preserving important consultative roles for school governing bodies. The Swartruggens matter is among the first to test how these new legal provisions should be interpreted and applied in practice.
EELC’s intervention in the matter
EELC’s primary concern is that the voices and best interests of the 78 affected learners may not be adequately represented in the proceedings, despite the significant impact the outcome may have on their education. These children have a constitutional right to be heard in matters that directly affect their schooling and future.
The EELC’s submissions in part A of the application highlights two critical issues:
- The right of learnersand their parents to be heard
The EELC is concerned that the school did not properly serve the application on the parents, guardians, and learners affected..This is especially concerning because the matter directly affects their children’s constitutional right to basic education. In matters concerning children, the Court is required to apply greater procedural safeguards to protect their best interests. The EELC is, therefore, making legal submissions that there is no valid justification for the school’s failure to ensure proper and effective service on the affected parents, guardians, and learners.
- Ensuring the court’s decision is based on properevidence
The EELC submits that the request to remove 78 learners from their current school and place them at Swartruggens Intermediate School is far-reaching and not supported by adequate evidence. There is no information before the Court regarding the capacity, resources, or suitability of the proposed school, or any evidence showing that the transfer would serve the best interests of the learners. The school have also failed to provide any information about the learners’ personal circumstances, educational needs, or the potential impact of the proposed removal on their right to basic education.
Importantly, the learners themselves have not been given an opportunity to be heard, which violates their rights under the Constitution, the Children’s Act, and international law. Legal principles and case law confirm that children have the right to participate in proceedings that affect them, and their views must be considered before decisions are made. The EELC, therefore, submits that the Court cannot grant the relief sought without first ensuring that the learners and their parents are properly heard, and that sufficient evidence is available to determine what outcome would best protect the learners’ interests.
Safeguarding Constitutional rights: Relief requested by the EELC
The EELC is not taking sides between the school and the North West Department of Education. Instead, our request to the Court is that:
- The best interests of the learners, particularly the 78 learners, must be the primary consideration;
- The Court must have sufficient evidence to make a decision that protects all affected learners; and
- The learners and their families must be given an opportunity to be heard before any final decision is made about their schooling.
- The EELC is seeking leave to engage with the affected learners and their parents and to place this information before the Court.
The EELC acknowledges the concerns about school capacity and resources. However, the Court cannot make a fair decision without comprehensive and objective evidence. Learners cannot simply be moved from one school to another unless it is proven that the receiving school can accommodate them safely, effectively, and in a manner that upholds their constitutional right to basic education. Anything less risks undermining both the law and the best interest of the children.
[END]
To arrange media interview, contact:
Papama Mabotshwa | Media and Communications Intern | papama@eelawcentre.org or 062 520 1818
