Judge slams Mbeki and Education Department over Pretoria High School for Girls ‘racism’ row

High court Judge Mandlenkosi Motha has strongly criticised the handling of the alleged racism controversy at Pretoria High School for Girls, accusing former President Thabo Mbeki of attempting to “sweep the issue under the rug” and the Gauteng Department of Education (GDE) of a “failure of leadership”.

Judge Mandlenkosi Motha.(Photo: Judges Matter)

The judge’s comments came during a hearing in the Gauteng Division of the High Court in Pretoria on Tuesday, 10 December, following a series of events that began after 12 learners, including eight prefects, were suspended on 24 July over allegations of racism.

The allegations centred on the pupils’ involvement in a WhatsApp group, where messages with racial connotations and “microaggressions” were reportedly shared. The department alleged that the conversations dismissed the ongoing dissatisfaction among black learners about the challenges they faced at the school.

The arguments

On 4 November, the GDE released a summary of an independent investigation into the allegations, which included findings that some white teachers at the school reportedly did not greet their black colleagues, citing confusion over whether they were educators or cleaners.

In response to the report, the School Governing Board (SGB) filed an urgent application with the high court, seeking access to the full report and an interdict to prevent the department from acting on the report’s recommendations.

Read more: Pretoria girls’ school governing body launches legal battle against education department over racism claims

In the court documents, SGB chairperson Craig Hezlett argued that the investigation was conducted unlawfully and accused the department of mishandling the situation. He described the investigation as “careless” and claimed the department had acted on an unfounded “whiff” of “racism”.

Hezlett also took aim at the department for pressuring the school’s principal, Phillipa Erasmus, into apologising to the students in what he described as a “humiliating” event that saw her “publicly embarrassed”.

Despite the department’s claim that the disciplinary panel had found no evidence of racism in the WhatsApp exchanges, Hezlett referred to a widely publicised letter from former President Thabo Mbeki, who, on behalf of the Thabo Mbeki Foundation, expressed support for the students’ acquittal, agreeing that the messages in question were not racist.

Hezlett argued that the MEC’s decision to launch an investigation was “willful and irrational” and that such a probe was not in the best interests of education in the province.

According to Hezlett, the findings of the investigation fell outside the inquiry’s original terms of reference and were “manifestly incorrect.” He also claimed that neither the school nor the SGB was given a chance to respond to the findings.

Hezlett further argued that the investigation appeared biased, with the investigator focused on finding fault even when no racism could be substantiated, and ignoring the possibility of innocent explanations for the events in question.

In the department’s response, South Tshwane district director Andries Nkadimeng argued that the SGB’s dissatisfaction with certain aspects of the report, as expressed in a media statement, did not make the report unlawful. He pointed out that the SGB’s conclusions were based on its discontent with the findings, but this alone did not invalidate the investigation.

Nkadimeng rejected the accusation that Erasmus had been coerced into apologising, stating that both he (Nkadimeng) and the principal had offered apologies voluntarily. He also dismissed claims of a “witch hunt,” calling them “completely unfounded.”

Nkadimeng firmly rejected any legal grounds for the department to be compelled to release the full report to the SGB. He maintained that the MEC’s decision to launch the investigation was made under the powers granted by the Gauteng School Education Act which permits the MEC to appoint an investigator if deemed necessary for the advancement of education in the province and was in the best interests of education.

Judge’s critique of Mbeki letter

Former president Thabo Mbeki. (Photo: Gallo Images / Sharon Seretlo)

Before the proceedings began, Judge Motha revealed that after reviewing the case papers twice, he had formed an initial view and was outspoken in his criticism of the actions taken by both Mbeki and the department.

The SGB’s application heavily leant on the letter sent by Mbeki. In the letter, Mbeki stated that after reviewing the WhatsApp messages, he and the foundation concluded there was no evidence of racism or hate speech. Mbeki wrote, “Our firm conclusion is that there is no such manifestation in the said comments.”

Judge Motha, however, dismissed the letter as “unfortunate” and suggested that “the less said about it, the better.” He emphasised the importance of reconciliation as a two-way process and pointed out that thus far, it had been one-sided. The judge also criticised the divisive language used in the WhatsApp group, stressing the need to address issues of race openly, rather than ignoring them, as Mbeki seemed to advocate in his letter.

Concerns over disciplinary actions and lack of solutions

Motha also expressed confusion over the decision to charge the students involved. The department had suspended 12 students on several charges, including some who were prefects and had lost their privileges. In the SGB’s legal papers, Hazlett argued that the department had pressured the school to initiate disciplinary proceedings, despite the school’s belief that no charges were warranted.

GDE spokesperson Steve Mabona clarified that the department did not pursue disciplinary charges against the students involved.

“The department did not pursue any charges against learners. However, the SGB instituted such disciplinary processes and later exonerated the implicated learners accordingly. As such, the department accepted their decision,” Mabona explained.

The refusal to release the full investigative report also came under scrutiny. Motha questioned why the department had not shared the report with the SGB, stressing that transparency was crucial for building a better South Africa.

Judge Motha also raised concerns about the 2016 protests at Pretoria High School for Girls, when students objected to what they deemed an anti-black hair policy. Despite the similar issues faced in 2016, Motha noted that the school had not put in place any effective mechanisms to address such concerns. He urged the authorities to develop concrete solutions or, if necessary, bring in experts in race relations to guide them.

EFF and ANC members protest outside Pretoria High School For Girls on 30 July 2024 after racism allegations emerged against 12 pupils. (Photo: Deaan Vivier / Beeld / Gallo Images)

Mabona said that since the 2016 protests, the department had taken steps to address systemic issues surrounding racism and inclusivity in schools. He emphasised that the department had implemented the relevant recommendations from prior investigations to tackle these challenges and promote a more inclusive school environment.

School anti-racism policies

In South Africa, schools are legally required to promote inclusive environments and address issues such as racism, reflecting the country’s ongoing effort to heal from its apartheid history. Several key laws and policies help guide this process:

• The Constitution of South Africa (1996), as the highest law in the country, explicitly prohibits discrimination on the grounds of race, ethnicity, gender and other factors. Section 9 ensures the right to equality and protection from discrimination, which applies to all public and private institutions, including schools.


• The South African Schools Act (1996) provides the legal framework for education in South Africa. It mandates that schools must foster non-racialism, and inclusivity and create a safe and supportive environment for all learners, requiring their policies to reflect these values.


• The Employment Equity Act (1998) primarily targets employment but also affects school staff and educators. It mandates that schools take active steps to eliminate discrimination and promote diversity in the workplace.


• The National Action Plan to Combat Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia, and Related Intolerance (NAP), launched in 2019, outlines national strategies for addressing racism. It calls for integrating anti-racism education into school curricula and for training teachers to address racial discrimination effectively. The plan encourages schools to work with communities, stakeholders and NGOs to promote human rights and social justice.


• The National Policy on the Prevention and Management of Learner Discipline (2008) provides clear guidelines for managing learner behaviour, with an emphasis on fairness, restorative justice and the prevention of violence, including racism and other forms of discrimination. The policy outlines procedures for addressing incidents of racial discrimination, bullying, and harassment, encouraging schools to adopt restorative justice practices where offenders reflect on their actions and take responsibility for the harm caused.

While there is a broad legal framework in place, the implementation of anti-racism policies across South African schools is inconsistent.

Some schools have specific anti-racism policies integrated into their codes of conduct. These policies outline unacceptable behaviours (such as racial slurs or discrimination) and the consequences for students and staff who engage in these behaviours. In addition to formal policies, many schools run educational programmes that aim to raise awareness about racism and promote tolerance and inclusivity. These may include workshops, seminars and activities designed to encourage students to reflect on their behaviour and attitudes towards others.

The way forward 

Advocate John Mullins SC, the SGB’s legal counsel, indicated that he had been instructed to seek an order of recusal against Judge Motha. However, to resolve the matter, Mullins proposed that the case be withdrawn temporarily. The case was removed from the court roll and costs will be decided at a later date.

Mabona said that according to the department’s records, no formal request for the report had been made in compliance with the necessary legislation, and therefore the report had not been released. He said the department was implementing recommendations from the investigative report.

Daily Maverick asked the SGB and the Thabo Mbeki Foundation for comment, but had not received a response at the time of publication. DM