Basic Education Minister Angie Motshekga and her department have been lashed by senior judges for their “woeful” inability to deliver textbooks to schools in Limpopo three years after a new curriculum was introduced.

The Supreme Court of Appeal on Wednesday dismissed the appeal by the Minister and the Department of Basic Education against the decision of the High Court in Pretoria‚ and upheld the cross-appeal by Basic Education For All and affected schools.

The court found that the DBE’s failure to provide each learner at public schools in Limpopo with a textbook for each subject‚ prior to the commencement of the 2014 school year‚ was an infringement of their rights to a basic education and declared that the DBE had failed to comply with a previous high court order relating to the delivery of textbooks for the 2012 school year.

The SCA stated that it “cannot be emphasised enough that basic education should be seen as a primary driver of transformation in South Africa”.

“We must guard against failing those who are most vulnerable. In this case we are dealing with the rural poor and with children. They are deserving of Constitutional protection.”

Activist group Section 27 hailed the decision of the court‚ stating: “A beautiful judgment. A globally significant judgment. The ruling vindicates among others the rights of learners to have access to their full complement of textbooks #TextbooksMatter”.

The SA Human Rights Commission also welcomed the ruling‚ calling it “a victory for the right of children to quality education”.

The department had argued that although the minister and her director-general were committed to providing a textbook for every child in every grade‚ “perfection is not the constitutional standard”.

The SCA said this was not a “lofty” ideal. The judgment criticised the Minister and Department for poor planning and implementation.

“The truth is that the DBE’s management plan was inadequate and its logistical ability woeful. One would have expected proper planning before the implementation of the new curriculum. This does not appear to have occurred. The DBE also had a three-year implementation period during which it could have conducted proper budgetary planning‚ perfected its database‚ and ensured accuracy in procurement and efficiency in delivery. It achieved exactly the opposite and blamed all and sundry.”

The SCA‚ noting that textbooks had been provided in every province except Limpopo‚ held that the DBE’s conduct amounted to unfair discrimination against the affected learners.

“Clearly‚ learners who do not have textbooks are adversely affected. Why should they suffer the indignity of having to borrow from neighbouring schools or copy from a blackboard which cannot‚ in any event‚ be used to write the totality of the content of the relevant part of the textbook? Why should poverty stricken schools and learners have to be put to the expense of having to photocopy from the books of other schools? Why should some children be able to work from textbooks at home and others not? There can be no doubt that those without textbooks are being unlawfully discriminated against.”