summary

Advert – scroll down

Advert

Breakdown per Province 

Download [1.69 MB]

Public comments as delivered to the NCOP

Download [4.41 MB]

IN THE MEDIA

The Basic Education Laws Amendment Bill (BELA) Bill remains the subject of major debate. Until now, School Governing Bodies have had the leeway to develop their schools’ admission and language policies but the BELA Bill requires that they submit these policies to provincial departments for approval. An academic, Professor Brahm Fleisch from the Wits School of Education has asked whether the bill will really address South Africa’s learning crisis.

The BELA Bill has some important changes coming that will affect homeschoolers. Let us unpack.
Join us on this amazing journey of Homesteading Homeschooling, Homemaking in a South African Township

Parliament has passed the Basic Education Law Amendment Bill through a unanimous vote. Now the Bill will go to the National Council of Provinces for a consideration. Opposition parties who held protests outside the parliamentary precinct rejecting the amendments are planning to launch a court bid. eNCA’s Nobesuthu Hejana reports

The National Assembly has passed the Basic Education Laws Amendment. The bill will see parents or guardians face jail time if their children are not enrolled when they reach school age. The controversial bill has been rejected by most parties. Education specialist, Prof. Mary Metcalfe, unpacks this.

The Education Laws Amendment Bill (BELAB) was presented in the General Assembly of Parliament on Thursday, October 26, where it was debated and subsequently voted on. FEDSAS was present in person, and Dr Jaco Deacon will provide feedback.
• What happened with BELA Bill in parliament on the October 26?
• How does it affect the 2024 SGB elections and training?
• What should schools and governing bodies do now?

Education in South Africa is taking a significant step forward as the Bela Bill, which outlaws physical punishment in schools, comes into effect. This new legislation prohibits the use of corporal punishment in educational institutions, reinforcing the country’s commitment to promoting a safe and conducive learning environment for students.

In South Africa’s province of Eastern Cape, many students are having to learn in overcrowded classrooms because there aren’t enough schools. The governing African National Congress says it’s trying to improve conditions in poor communities – but it’s proving difficult to make progress. Al Jazeera’s Haru Mutasa reports from Stutterheim, South Africa

SUMMARY

The Bill proposes to amend the South African Schools Act, 1996 (Act No. 84 of 1996), and the Employment of Educators Act, 1998 (Act No. 76 of 1898) (the SASA and the EEA, respectively), so as to align them with developments in the education landscape and to ensure that systems of learning are put in place in a manner which gives effect to the right to basic education enshrined in section 29(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996.

Amongst others, the Bill seeks to amend certain definitions; to provide that attendance of Grade R is compulsory, and to provide for system improvements in terms of admission of learners to public schools. It also provides for financial and public accountability frameworks for governing bodies and provincial departments.

The Bill further provides for additional Regulatory powers of the Minister, and enhancing decision making and oversight powers of Heads of Departments and Members of the Executive Councils.

The Bill also proposes technical and substantive adjustments, clarify certain existing provisions, insert provisions which are not provided for in existing legislation and strengthen enforcement mechanisms for offences and penalties.

Memorandum of Objects and Clause by Clause analysis

Download [81.37 KB]

Basic Education Laws Amendment Bill

Download [197.55 KB]

Encourage participation on the BELA Bill with this notice

Download [173.31 KB]

Socio Economic Impact Assessment 

Download [717.65 KB]

Portfolio Committee on Basic Education, 30 May 2023

Committee meeting 19 April 2022

PUBLIC HEARINGS

Kwa-Zulu Natal – Pinetown Civic Centre

Toll Speelman Community Hall, Northern Cape

Thobi Kula Indoor Sports Centre, Queenstown

Western Cape, Ceres

Mthatha Town Hall, King Sabatha Dalindyebo

NORTHERN CAPE – Upington

Tsakane Community Hall, City of Ekurhuleni

Jack Botes Hall, Polokwane

Rustenburg City Hall

Phuthaditjaba, Free State

Mabopane Indoor Sports Centre, Gauteng

Simon Sefuthi Community Hall, Free State

Johannesburg City Hall, Gauteng

Lenyenye Community Hall (Mopani District)

Bill Makwarela Community Hall

Phuthaditjaba, Free State

Freedom of Religion SA (FOR SA)

TEMPLATE PROVIDED BY FOR SA

I strongly oppose the Prevention and Combating of Hate Crimes and Hate Speech Bill [B9B – 2018], which I believe to be unconstitutional and unnecessary, for the following reasons:

  1. The Bill violates our constitutional rights as religious persons to express our religious beliefs without fear of punishment or persecution (section 15, read with section 16). Increasingly, around the world but also in South Africa, various holy scriptures (particularly on contentious issues) are regarded as “politically incorrect” or “offensive”, allegedly causing emotional and/or social harm.
  2. I specifically oppose the Bill’s:
    1. wide definition of “harm” (in Clause 1);
    2. the failure to define “hatred” (in Clause 1); and
    3. definition of, and creation of, the crime of “hate speech” (in Clause 4).
  3. The creation of the crime of “hate speech” for saying / distributing something which could possibly be construed as “harmful”, will have certain unintended consequences, namely the criminalisation of good / well-meaning people who will be prosecuted for saying what they sincerely believe (according to their holy texts) and sent to jail.
  4. There are already sufficient existing laws dealing with “hate speech”.
  5. For all of the reasons given, I ask:
    1. For the scrapping of the “hate speech” sections from the Bill altogether;
    2. Alternatively, should the “hate speech” provisions remain part of the Bill, we ask:
      1. That “harm” be defined as: “gross emotional and psychological detriment that objectively and severely undermines the human dignity of the targeted group”; and
      2. That “hatred” be defined as: “strong and deeply-felt emotions of enmity, ill-will, detestation, malevolence and vilification against members of an identifiable group, that implies that members of that group are to be despised, scorned, denied respect and subjected to ill-treatment based on their group affiliation”.
    3. That Clause 4(2)(d) (the “religious exemption clause”) be strengthened as follows to protect:
      “expression of any religious conviction, tenet, belief, teaching, doctrine or writings, by a religious organisation or an individual, in public or in private, to the extent that such expression does not actively support, instigate, exhort, or call for extreme detestation, vilification, enmity, ill-will and malevolence that constitutes incitement to cause gross emotional and psychological harm that severely undermines the dignity of the targeted group, based on race, ethnicity, gender, religion or sexual orientation”.