JUSTIFICACIÓN Y RELEVANCIA

The erstwhile Minister of Education, in consultation with the Council of Education, gave notice in terms of section 61 of the South African Schools Act of 1996 of the regulation relating to safety measures in public schools, with particular reference to violence-free and drug-free public schools:

1. All public schools are hereby declared drug free and danger free zones. 2. No persons may:

a) Allow any dangerous objects into the premises of a public school; b) Carry any dangerous object;

c) Store any dangerous objects in the public-school premises except in officially designated places identified by the Principal of the school;

d) Possess illegal drugs on public school premises;

e) Enter a public-school premise under the influence of any drug or alcohol;

f) Cause any form of violence or disturbance which negatively impacts on the activities of any public school;

35

g) Wittingly condone, hide, encourage and connive in, the possession of dangerous objects; or refuse, fail or neglect to report the sighting or presence of any dangerous object to the department, authorities or the police as soon as possible;

h) Directly or indirectly cause harm to anyone who exposes another person who makes an attempt to frustrate the prevention of dangerous objects and activities.

In 1999, the Secretariat for Safety and Security, the Department of Education and the National Youth Commission developed a joint framework document entitled: ‘Tirisano - Towards an Intervention Strategy to Address Youth Violence in schools. In this document, lack of school safety is highlighted as a critical obstacle to learning. Reference is made to educators perpetrating violence on learners through corporal punishment, learner-on-learner violence, male on-female violence, as well as violence inflicted on school-going learners by youths outside the school. In terms of the common South African law, an educator cares for the child and acts in loco parentis– which means he or she is in charge of the child in the absence of the parent (Oosthuizen, 1999).

However, according to Singh (2006), no reference is made to learner-on-educator violence in the entire document, which is based on the ‘safe schools’ initiative driven by the desire to give support and guidance to the youth, but the safety and dignity of educators is side-lined. The entire document focuses on the youths as victims of violence and how the youths should be protected from violence within schools. Essentially, this initiative obligates educators and principals to uphold their duty of dealing with school-based violence while, on the other hand, there is no categorical commitment to safeguard educators.

Section 8 of the South African Schools Act provides that the governing body of a public school must adopt a code of conduct. In this code, violence against educators can be addressed through sanctions being imposed. Should any learner be found guilty of contravening the code of conduct, they can be subjected to one of the following punitive measures:

• be suspended from school for a period of not more than one week;

• receive a recommendation for expulsion, which can only be granted by the Head of Department in the Department of Education.

Notwithstanding these measures, Beckmann, Foster and Smith (1997), argue that the South African Schools Act does not specify:

• The seriousness of the misconduct that justifies expulsion; • The specific disciplinary procedures to be followed; or

36

The KwaZulu-Natal Education Department launched an Employee Assistance Programme (EAP) which serves provides assistance to every employee who experiences personal as well as work-related problems. Although reference is made to workplace related violence and post- trauma counselling, it is not clear whether the violence perpetrated by learners on educators is included. This policy is underpinned by job performance. The usefulness of the programme is thus debatable as it is vague in the range of support that it provides, and it does not include preventative measures to safeguard educators from violence as part of its support programme.

According to Singh (2006), there are no effective support structures in place to cushion and protect educators from violence in the schools. The following points summaries some of the shortcomings of the programme:

• The safe school policy does not include learner-on-educator violence;

• The South African Schools Act does not include provisions that ensure that the rights of all school personnel are catered for;

• The South African Schools Act does not classify the serious acts of misconduct and thus there are no clear guidelines as to which category of violence against educators falls into;

• It is practically impossible, with the existing policies, to expel learners regardless of how serious the transgression is;

• The EAP programme does not include preventative measures to quell school-based violence; and

• None of the existing pieces of legislation and policies in education make provision for the safety of the educator.