LIKE a bolt out of the blue, what was once a stable, happening school in the affluent area of Bryanston in Gauteng suddenly became a hotbed of racial violence and controversy.
Or was it so out of the blue? Some would argue the signs that all was not well at Bryanston High school had been there for a while, before things came to a head with the brutal beating of a black learner, Lindelani Khanyile, by three white fellow schoolgoers.
A National Youth Commission (NYC) report on the incident, submitted as advice to the Gauteng Department of Education (GDE), identifies several areas of school management that made it possible for such unacceptable behaviour to have taken place. The importance of fair-handed school leadership in handling such volatile situations is emphasised in the report, which states: ”It is our experience … that the more serious and chronic manifestations of [racial] tensions require active leadership and sensitive responses to facilitate a mediated situation.”
Bryanston High’s leadership in the person of principal Dave Robinson is one area that receives critical scrutiny from the NYC. Beyond the apparent ”insensitivity” with which the immediate crisis was treated, the NYC report notes that vital proactive steps were not taken. A prime example cited is: ”The absence of playground control systems is a stunning omission given what appears to have been well known long-standing tensions between learners.”
However, Robinson points out that he was new to the school at the time, and therefore did not know of the tensions in the school. The school teaching staff have since been taken through two courses dealing with issues such as tolerance and diversity.
While Robinson says those involved are in the process of making peace with each other, the controversy that the incident generated in the broader society continues to rage. This is because the three boys — JJ Harris, Tyrone Plumme and Ryan Vivian — were found guilty by a school disciplinary committee of assault, and a recommendation was given to Gauteng MEC for Education Ignatius Jacobs that the three be expelled. However, Jacobs chose to accept the appeal from the three boys against their expulsion, deciding instead that they should remain at the school.
GDE representative Lebelo Maloka explained the reasons given for the MEC’s decision: ”We have to look at the context of youngsters facing the legacy of apartheid, many of whom may have prejudices towards certain learners. Do we really deal with them by expelling them? Because wherever they go they will perpetuate their [racist] behaviour.” Maloka adds: ”If we insist on certain corrective measures, we believe we are building these youngsters.”
Robinson emphasises that the boys will definitely face punishment (not to mention legal action by Khanyile), although at the time of going to press the exact form of the sanction was still under discussion.
Robinson’s own view is, ”I can understand [Jacobs’s] decision in that context, [but] we’ve lost the ultimate course of disciplinary action. If you can’t be expelled for that [behaviour], what can you be expelled for? There’s a concern about discipline in schools generally.”
But many in the nation expressed utter outrage at the decision. ”Hang your head in shame, Jacobs”, read the headline in one weekly newspaper, which accused the MEC of not expelling the three boys ”because their parents are wealthy, powerful and, it would appear, have influence in high places”.
The South African Human Rights Commission also added its voice of concern to the decision not to expel the boys, although the organisation has declined to detail its objections. However, Maloka says, ”We’ve made a clear commitment to make the best of all the learners in this province. The MEC’s decision has been taken and is final.”
Did Jacobs make an unjust decision, biased in favour of the bullies because of their families’ standing in society? Is the message to schoolgoers that brutality — with or without the race factor — is acceptable? Or was this a considered decision that avoided ”quick fix” solutions and intended instead to really force those boys to face the consequences of violent, racist behaviour?
What do you think?
— The Teacher/Mail & Guardian, August 30, 2000.
M&G Supplements