HPP Mokopane learner back at school following suspension row

MOKOPANE – Kekana earlier this year also went to court against the school in a case relating to the school’s hair policy.
The most recent case relates to Kekana having been accused of possession of drugs on the school premises, which led to his subsequent expulsion.
The latest court order, made final on 23 November, states that the school and Principal, Jimmy Steele, must reinstate Kekana pending a decision of the Head of Department of the Department of Basic Education.
The school and Steele were also interdicted and prohibited from discriminating, victimising and harassing Kekana emotionally, physically and otherwise.
The school was ordered to pay the costs of the application, including reserved costs of 12 October and preliminary costs, on a party and party scale.
Kamogelo’s mother, Maxime, who acted on his behalf, urgently approached the High Court in Polokwane on 12 October to obtain a temporary court order, which ordered Kekana back to school after he was suspended from school on 10 October.

Read more: Suspended Mokopane learner approaches High Court

The school cited the reason for the suspension to be drugs found in his possession on the school’s premises. The case appeared before the court again on 12 November but judgement was reserved for 23 November.
Kekana’s attorney, Adv Mphafolane Koma, informed Bosveld about the court’s decision: “Judgement was handed down today. The principal and school have been ordered to pay punitive legal costs”.
During the case, the background of the application was that Kekana was to undergo a disciplinary hearing at Hoërskool Piet Potgieter on 28 September.
He was charged with the contravention of four school policies and regulations: (1) absence from detention on 3 August 2018, (2) bringing space cakes containing illegal substance to school on 27 August 2018, (3) consuming space cakes containing illegal substance at school on 27 August 2018, and (4) trading with space cakes containing illegal substance at school on 27 August.
The judge said in his judgement that notice to attend the disciplinary hearing was given to Kekana to give to his mother and guardian.
“The applicant did not attend the hearing. Although there is no proof that she was served with the charge sheet and notice of the disciplinary hearing, it appears that she did know about the hearing date as her counsel was informed, at her request, through an e-mail.
“It further appears that counsel was not aware of why the e-mail was being sent to him as he was not on brief at the time.
The judge further stated that the disciplinary hearing proceeded in the absence of Kekana and his mother.
“The learner was found guilty and a sanction of expulsion was taken.”
Kekana was subsequently expelled from school pending the outcome of the decision of the Head of the Department of the Department of Basic Education as the officer with authority to endorse the decision of that magnitude.
“It was against this background that the mother approached the court to interdict the suspension process. It is not clear as to when the Head of the Department will take a decision on the expulsion of the learner from the school.
“It is not clear as to what purpose will the suspensions serve, even if it may be restricted to 14 days only or to such extended period as the law may permit.”
Sikhwari said Kekana at the time was approaching the examination.

You may also want to read: High Court rules Hoërskool Piet Potgieter’s hair policy null and void

“This is a crucial era in the life of a scholar in terms of preparing for exam without worrying about things of this nature. The suspension will infringe on the right of the learner to education and he will suffer irreparable harm.”
He said no case was made that the school and principal have reasonable prospects of success in the endorsement of the decision to expel the learner from school by the Head of the Department of Basic Education. No case was made on the balance of convenience favouring the school and Steele in this regard. No case was made to the effect that the presence of Kamogelo will cause disruptions at school or any prejudice to the school operation.
Sikhwari said he was satisfied that the applicant successfully established a clear right to education as emanating from the Constitution.
“The applicant established a reasonable apprehension of risk, an absence of alternative remedy and the balance of convenience running in favour of the learner.”
Kamogelo’s mother, Maxime told Bosveld that she is very happy with the outcome, but that she is worried about her child’s performance.
“He was traumatised the whole year, but we will see how the next year will go.”
Contacted for comment, Steele said the school’s governing body awaits final advice from the school’s legal team regarding the effect of the ruling on the remedies at their disposal.
lionel@nmgroup.co.za