The South African Constitution provides that a child’s best interests are of paramount importance in every matter concerning the child. This principle emanates from the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) and the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (ACRWC). Accordingly the State and its various departments have adopted and are enforcing legislation and policies in defence of the child’s best interest. The principle of the best interest of the child is seldom observed in most of our schools. Incidents of child abuse are on the increase, especially by educators. This unfortunate situation prevails against the backdrop of legislation which condemns these atrocities. Section 17 of the Employment of Educators Act1 provides that educators must be discharged if they are found guilty of, inter alia, sexual abuse, intimate relationship with a learner and assault with grievous bodily harm. These measures have been taken to combat the vicious cycle of child abuse in schools and to advance children’s-rights agenda and the universal principle of the child’s best interests. For the department to successfully prosecute educator cases against child abuse, the testimony of a child witness is crucial. However, it is shocking to discover that the interests of the child witness are not always served in these disciplinary hearings. Officials are prone to be biased towards their fellow professionals at the expense of the interest of the child witness. This situation normally arises probably as a result of a lack of professional capacity because most of these officials tasked with disciplining educators have a teaching, human-resource or legal qualification. Others may have been recruited from the ranks of the trade-union movement without any formal qualification. Secondly, they may be specialists in the field of labour law which is essentially concerned with the regulating the employer and employee relationship. Thirdly, the disciplinary code and procedures that are used during educator-disciplinary processes are premised on the principles and values of the Labour 1 Act 76 of 1998. Relations Act Code of Good Practice: Dismissal2 and Schedule 2 of the Employment of Educators Act3 which addresses the interest of the child witness to a very limited extend. Finally, the policies regulating workplace discipline are generally biased towards employee rights as espoused in the Labour Relations Act4 and CCMA guidelines on misconduct arbitrations. This study has identified a number of challenges confronting the child witness and also areas of capacity improvement on the side of officials officiating over the disciplinary cases of educators. These challenges form the basis for a comprehensive and consolidated list of aspects in which officials need to be trained to effectively promote and defend the interest of the child witness in a professional manner. The role of the departmental representative in becoming the champions of the democratic Constitution and the vanguard of the child’s best interest cannot be over-emphasised. The question of how best to serve the best interest of the child witness has been addressed. The child witness can be a credible witness provided officials win over his or her confidence to speak out against abuse. The 16 days of activism against women and children abuse has to resonate consciously with departmental officials.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:nmmu/vital:10257 |
| Date | January 2014 |
| Creators | Seshibe, Maropene Viniel |
| Publisher | Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Faculty of Law |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis, Masters, LLM |
| Format | iv, 52 leaves, pdf |
| Rights | Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University |
Page generated in 0.0026 seconds