Empowering learners by addressing the root causes of violence in SA schools

“Being safe at school is something I and other learners crave. Not having to worry about whether you could get killed or become a victim of any kind of harassment would make learning fun and motivate us to study to our fullest potential.” — Emihle Tima, Grade 11 learner.

Background

While school serves as a safety net for learners, it can also be a place of violence due to the persistent issue of bullying. On 16 October 2025, we woke up to a viral video showing a learner being brutally assaulted by eight other learners from Milnerton High School. This was not an isolated incident. Bullying has continued to emerge on social media, showing learner-to-learner, teacher-to-learner, and, in some cases, learner-to-teacher violence. 

The Milnerton case illustrates the longstanding need to address bullying in schools. However, the issue is not clear cut. If the intention is to deal with bullying, simply arresting the perpetrators will not be enough. This case presents complications that we address below. 

We emphasise that we do not condone violence in schools, and that every learner directly or indirectly affected by bullying must receive protection and psychosocial support, along with other necessary assistance in accordance with Department of Basic Education’s policies.

Bullied learners 

From the outset, it is important to stress that bullying is a form of violence. Every learner who encounters violence must be immediately safeguarded and offered all necessary support. School-Based Support Teams are directly required to offer support to learners who experience violence. Should these teams lack the capacity to provide psychosocial support services, a District-Based Support Team is required to intervene. 

Learners who bully 

Schools are not islands within communities. They exist as part of the communities in which they are based. As such, community norms, behaviours and a culture of violence can extend to school environments. A duty of protection extends to school communities at all times that children are within the school environment. 

Learners who perpetrate violence must be held accountable using school disciplinary processes. Importantly, schools have a duty to protect all learners, including those who perpetrate violence. This approach is aimed at ensuring that learners are not discarded, but supported and rehabilitated.

Who is a learner, who is an adult? 

The Milnerton High School incident revealed an ongoing culture of bullying in school communities. Importantly, it revealed that learners can be exposed to the criminal justice system. We accept that learners who are 18 years and older are legally recognised as majors (the legal term for adults). However, they remain learners and ought to enjoy protection and duties that apply to learners. 

Furthermore, 18 years is the norm for Grade 12 learners. In cases where learners contravene a school’s code of conduct, they must be dealt with in accordance with the school’s code and anti-bullying policies. The immediate criminalisation of learners could lead to schools being a breeding ground for criminality, and we must be mindful of the consequences learners may face.

School-based interventions for bullying

All schools are required to develop their own code of conduct and anti-bullying policies. According to section 8(5) of the Schools Act, a code of conduct must contain provisions of due process safeguarding the interests of the learner and any other party involved in disciplinary proceedings. This provision is flexible; it allows the members of the school governing bodies (“SGBs”), which must include a representative of learners, to provide for measures when developing a school code of conduct that safeguard all learners involved in disciplinary hearings. Therefore, a school code of conduct may include measures for accessing psychosocial support for learners who are involved in disciplinary hearings. 

Furthermore, schools are required to have school-based safety structures such as safety committees and safety officers, and must have their own safety plans. These structures ought to be adequately trained to provide support in addressing school violence. However, in practice such school-based structures often do not exist, and in cases where they do exist they are often not adequately trained, and lack resources. This was revealed by the Equal Education’s iSafety Ngoku report. 

The Department of Basic Education and policing in schools 

The use of criminalisation is not coincidental following this year’s shift towards strengthening policing in schools by the Department of Basic Education. On 24 June 2025, Basic Education Minister Siviwe Gwarube and Police Minister Senzo Mchunu (currently suspended), collaborated on the publication of the Safe Schools Protocol that aimed to advance learner safety. Both ministers used the release of the Safe Schools Protocol as an opportunity for public posturing. They introduced their revised Safe Schools Protocol as a clear mandate for the use of policing and criminalisation of learners. The protocol fails to offer meaningful solutions for the root causes of the violence. Furthermore, it threatens to perpetuate the department’s longstanding approach of evading its responsibility to learners.

The revived emphasis on the Department of Basic Education-SAPS Protocol suggests that the department continues to misdiagnose techniques for combating school violence. Promoting solutions that rely extensively on policing will negatively affect learners in the long term. While we recognise the importance of a multisectoral approach to combating crime and violence in schools and communities, we must emphasise that the department has a direct responsibility to ensure learners’ safety without the introduction of policing. 

Despite the existence of a more holistic — albeit poorly implemented — National School Safety Framework, it is concerning that this protocol is the most widely publicised school safety intervention under the new administration. The involvement of the police force in schools further perpetuates violence, rather than addressing it, and it is a fact that it will mostly be used in the townships. 

The department’s move towards the introduction of policing in education is not surprising, as it is headed by a Democratic Alliance minister. 

The DA’s programmes mirror the US’ approach, as seen in the Western Cape with the introduction of intervention facilities. The department and SAPS’ collaboration perpetuates the school-to-prison pipeline. Before resorting to the SAPS to address violence, schools should be encouraged to employ nurturing techniques, like positive discipline mechanisms, to avoid children being exposed to the criminal justice system. 

Recycling of policies 

The promulgation of the Safe Schools Protocol is an ill-prepared response to violence in schools. The department has a range of sources and policies on school and community safety that are not regularly updated or acted upon.

In 2023, Equal Education published its iSafety Ngoku report after a series of consultations with about 40 schools across the Western Cape. As part of the recommendations of our report, we propose a revision of the National School Violence Study to help the department make an informed decision about a long-term solution to school violence. The last such study was conducted in 2012 and is outdated. This would help the department in obtaining updated and representative data with a view to better understanding and identifying context-specific factors. Compared with the data that schools are able to provide, the data used by the SAPS is not conducive to preventive and proactive school safety interventions.

Regrettably, neither the department nor the SAPS has been able to inspire public confidence in the effectiveness of the 2011 Safe Schools Protocol. The department has, over the years, continued to formulate policies on learner safety while failing to ensure their implementation. As part of the iSafety Ngoku report, we argue that the department must emphasise the use of existing policies.

Lack of learner voices in policy-making 

Child participation in matters that involve them is a constitutional imperative and is further emphasised in the Children’s Act. In the development of the Safe Schools Protocol, learner voices continue to be left out. Learners’ input in policy-making is important and would help ensure that the solutions are arrived at through a consultative process.

Having engaged some learner members at Equal Education upon the publication of the Safe Schools Protocol, they reported that they fear the involvement of policing in education and instead proposed the strengthening of school safety structures.

Call to action 

The Department of Basic Education continues to misdiagnose the root causes of school violence. The publication of the Safe Schools Protocol shows that the department is trying to cure the symptoms, and not the illness itself. In both protocols, of 2011 and 2025, there is no provision for psychosocial support for learners. The promulgation of the protocol does not seek to address school violence. Police involvement in schools did not produce effective results in 2011, and will not produce any now. In 2019, Statistics South Africa reported that more than 1 million out of 13 million children aged five to 17 years reported that they had experienced some form of violence at school. But just establishing the protocol does not combat this. 

The department continues to be at the forefront of criminalising children through the introduction of policing in schools. As a result, schools continue to be a fertile ground for criminal grooming. As a general rule, school-based solutions to combating violence should be strengthened without relying on the police. The 2025 Safe Schools Protocol fails to acknowledge the importance of positive discipline mechanisms that are aimed at rehabilitating learners and ensuring their rights are protected without exposing them to the criminal justice system. The Screening Identification Assessment and Support policy is one of many that aim to support learners, but teachers are generally not adequately equipped to apply it. 

Effective implementation of the policy could help unlock psychosocial support services required by learners experiencing violence at school. The department must establish systems that enable learners who are exposed to sexual harassment or grooming by teachers to voice their complaints without fear of repercussions. 

Our call to action to the Department of Basic Education and provincial education departments includes the following: 

• Schools must be supported in developing their anti-bullying policies and use of the department’s existing policies.
• Prioritisation of learner voices in dealing with their safety.
• Emphasis on provisioning of learner support and promotion of positive discipline.
• Effective implementation of existing safety policies, and making sure educators know about them.
• The department must order a revised National School Violence Study. DM

Emihle Tima is a Grade 11 learner member at Equal Education (Equaliser), Makanatsa Ziyambi is a community leader at Equal Education, and Yolisa Piliso is a researcher and admitted attorney of the High Court. He leads the Child Protection and Community Safety programme at Equal Education.