Note: Mandatory Sanctions Miss the Mark: An Evaluation of Centre for Child Law & others v SA Council for Educators & others 2024 (4) SA 473 (SC)

Author Cecile de Villiers

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Lecturer, University of Cape Town
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 45 Issue 3, 2024, p. 2221 – 2238
https://doi.org/10.47348/ILJ/v45/i3a5

Abstract

Managing the conduct of public educators is the joint responsibility of the relevant provincial department of education as employer and the South African Council for Educators (educators’ council) tasked with upholding ethics in basic education. Each has its own disciplinary code and procedures to manage educator misconduct, and both include mandatory sanctions for misconduct such as assault. The Centre for Child Law challenged the disciplinary decisions by presiding officers in two assault cases where mandatory sanctions were imposed in line with the mandatory sanctions policy of the educators’ council. While the High Court found it a constitutional imperative that the educators’ council revise its mandatory sanctions policy, the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) held that the policy unlawfully restricted decision- makers’ discretion. The disciplinary decisions made by the educators’ council were held to be unlawful, invalid and in breach of its constitutional obligations towards children. This note illustrates the risks posed by mandatory sanctions to the effective management of educator misconduct. It argues that the SCA judgment has broader significance for the management of misconduct, particularly assault, in public basic education and that the educators’ council and employer should abandon mandatory sanctions in response to educator misconduct.