The governing body of an Afrikaans public school named after a former prime minister who was instrumental in the promulgation of apartheid has won a legal battle in the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) to rename the institution.
Hoërskool DF Malan, established in 1954, obtained the permission of then prime minister Dr Daniel Francois Malan, who served as prime minister from 1948 to 1954, to be named after him.
However, more than three decades into South Africa's constitutional democracy, the name is regarded as an albatross around the neck of a school in Bellville known for its culture of academic excellence and policy of inclusivity. Over four years the school achieved a 100% matric pass rate. A decision was taken in 2020 to embark on a lengthy consultative process to chose new school symbols, values and a name.
The first request for change came from an alumnus who wrote to the governing body in 2018, saying the name was “insensitive and inappropriate”. Two more letters were received in September 2019 from a parent of two pupils. The pressure ramped up in 2020 when a group called “DF Malan Must Fall” joined the fray.
“A public institution’s name often says more about its identity, ethos and culture than its written mission statement. This is even more so if the institution is named after a controversial historical figure,” reads a judgment handed down on Wednesday by the SCA.
“It is thus unfortunate that more than three decades into our constitutional democracy there are still public institutions which are named after individuals who were instrumental either in the development or implementation of the universally deprecated apartheid ideology. The DF Malan High School ... which bears the name of one of the chief architects of apartheid, is one such an institution.”
Barend Hermanus Rautenbach, Johan Smit, Francois Malan and Barend de Klerk — parents affected by the decision to change the school name to DF Akademie — took umbrage and hauled the governing body to the Western Cape High Court in December 2021 seeking an order reviewing and setting aside the name-change decision.
They argued the governing body did not have statutory power to change the name, the consultative process it adopted was procedurally unfair and irrational, and the decision was not rationally connected to the information before the governing body.
Their application was dismissed with costs when the high court found no fault with the procedure adopted by the governing body to change the name. However, they were granted leave to appeal to the SCA.
The SCA agreed with the previous ruling by the high court that there was no other entity better placed than the governing body to decide on such issues.
The name of Dr Malan harks back to the apartheid era, an association that is fundamentally at odds with the school’s ethos of inclusivity and its transformative vision. It is undeniably a hindrance to the school’s declared commitment to advance its vision of inclusivity and transformation
— Supreme Court of Appeal
“The governing body is a democratically elected entity, which represents the best interests of the school, educators, learners and the community served by the school. It is thus best placed to decide on issues pertaining to the school’s symbols and its identity,” ruled the SCA.
“Counsel for the governing body has correctly submitted that governing bodies regularly exercise several functions, which are not mentioned in the Schools Act, such as fundraising, marketing, meetings with parents and enforcement of the obligation to pay school fees. It would be absurd to suggest that governing bodies are precluded from performing those functions simply because the Schools Act does not expressly empower them to do so.”
The SCA found the decision to change the name to DF Akademie was taken pursuant to a fair and extensive consultative process.
“Even though the governing body would not have been bound to implement the majority view, the majority did in fact vote in favour of the new name. The name of Dr Malan harks back to the apartheid era, an association that is fundamentally at odds with the school’s ethos of inclusivity and its transformative vision. It is undeniably a hindrance to the school’s declared commitment to advance its vision of inclusivity and transformation,” the court found.
“The papers contain several poignant statements by learners expressing concern that the school’s name, and what it connotes, may negatively impact on their future. The governing body’s decision to purge the school of this unfortunate association with a disgraced legacy is thus undeniably rational and in the best interests of the school and all its stakeholders.”
“It is a matter of historical record that the policy of apartheid led to human rights abuses, violent oppression, arbitrary land dispossession and the disenfranchisement of the majority of South Africans. Despite the advent of our constitutional democracy in 1994, the ignominious consequences of apartheid still haunt South African society and it will probably take several generations to eradicate them fully,” the court ruled.
The appeal by the four parents was dismissed with costs.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.