Chairperson of the Council of the University of South Africa and Others v Afriforum NPC

CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA In the matter between: CHAIRPERSON OF THE COUNCIL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA CHAIRPERSON OF THE SENATE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA and AFRIFORUM NPC Case CCT 135/20 First Applicant Second Applicant Third Applicant Respondent Neutral citation: Chairperson of the Council of UNISA v AfriForum NPC [2021] ZACC 32 Coram: Khampepe ADCJ, Jafta J, Madlanga J, Majiedt J, Mhlantla J, Pillay AJ, Theron J, Tlaletsi AJ and Tshiqi J Judgment: Majiedt J (unanimous) Heard on: 20 May 2021 Decided on: 22 September 2021 Summary: University language policy — phasing out of Afrikaans as a language of teaching and learning — limitation of section 29(2) of the Constitution — justification required 1 ORDER/BEVEL On appeal from the Supreme Court of Op appèl vanaf die Hoogste Hof van Appèl Appeal (hearing an appeal from the High (vir die aanhoor van ’n appèl vanaf die Court of South Africa, Gauteng Division, Hooggeregshof van Suid-Afrika, Gauteng Pretoria): 1. 2. Afdeling, Pretoria): Leave to appeal is granted. 1. Verlof tot appèl word Save as set out below, the toegestaan. appeal is dismissed. 2. Behalwe soos hieronder 3. The order of the Supreme uiteengesit, word die appèl Court of Appeal is suspended van die hand gewys. until the commencement of 3. Die bevel van die Hoogste Hof the University of South van Appèl word opgeskort tot Africa’s 2023 academic year. die aanvang van die 4. In the event that the University Universiteit van Suid-Afrika of South Africa decides to se 2023 akademiese jaar. continue with the language 4. Indien die Universiteit van policy adopted in 2016, the Suid-Afrika besluit om voort requirements of section 29(2) te gaan met die taalbeleid wat of the Constitution must be in 2016 aanvaar is, moet die complied with. vereistes van artikel 29(2) van 5. If, by the commencement of die Grondwet nagekom word. the 2023 academic year, the 5. Indien, teen die aanvang van University of South Africa die 2023 akademiese jaar, die decides to adopt an entirely Universiteit van Suid-Afrika new language policy, the order besluit om ’n heeltemal nuwe of the Supreme Court of taalbeleid te aanvaar, sal die Appeal, save for the costs bevel van die Hoogste Hof van order, will fall away. 2 6. The University of South Appèl, behalwe vir sy Africa must pay AfriForum’s kostebevel, wegval. costs in this Court, including 6. Die Universiteit van Suid- the costs of two counsel. Afrika moet AfriForum se koste in hierdie Hof betaal, insluitende die koste van twee advokate. JUDGMENT/UITSPRAAK MAJIEDT J (unanimous): MAJIEDT R (eenparig): Introduction Inleiding [1] CJ Langenhoven, the celebrated [1] CJ Langenhoven, die gevierde Afrikaans writer and a fierce activist for the Afrikaanse skrywer en vurige kampvegter language, described Afrikaans as “our van die taal, het Afrikaans beskryf as “ons highest honour, our greatest possession, the hoogste eer, ons grootste besitting, die een en one and only white man’s language which enigste witmans-taal wat in Suid-Afrika was made in South Africa”.1 But another geskep is”.1 Maar ’n ander hoogs acclaimed Afrikaans writer of more recent aangeskrewe Arikaanse skrywer van meer times, Jan Rabie, tellingly observed that “we onlangse tye, Jan Rabie, het treffend distort history when we present Afrikaans opgemerk dat “ons die geskiedenis verwring today as increasingly ‘whiter’ than it really wanneer ons Afrikaans vandag voorhou as 1 Cited by Giliomee The Afrikaners: Biography of a People (Tafelberg Publishers Limited, Cape Town 2003) (Giliomee I) at 369. CJ Langenhoven lived between 1873 and 1932, and is acknowledged as having been staunchly conservative in his outlook. He is perhaps best known for authoring the lyrics of apartheid South Africa’s national anthem, “Die Stem van Suid-Afrika”. 1 Aangehaal deur Giliomee The Afrikaners: Biography of a People (Tafelberg Uitgewers Beperk, Kaapstad 2003) (Giliomee I) op 369. CJ Langenhoven het tussen 1873 en 1932 geleef en hy word alom beskou as iemand met ‘n stoere konserwatiewe lewensuitkyk. Hy is seker meeste bekend as skrywer van die lirieke van die volkslied van apartheid Suid-Afrika,“Die Stem van Suid-Afrika”. 3 is so that it fits our ideology of increasing toenemend ‘witter’ as wat dit werklik is ten separation”.2 And a giant of Afrikaans einde ons ideologie van toenemende literature, Breyten Breytenbach, said in an apartheid te pas”.2 En ’n reus van Afrikaanse affidavit in Gelyke Kanse: literatuur, Breyten Breytenbach, het in ’n eedsverklaring in Gelyke Kanse verklaar: “Afrikaans is the living and changing and change-making outcome of diverging and at times conflicting histories. These diverse origins characterised by adaptation, conquest, subjugation, oppression, survival, resistance, transformation – descended from European dialects, Malay, Portuguese, seafarer language, Khoi languages, Arabic Afrikaans, the Qur’an and the Bible, the courts and churches and kitchens and hospitals and vineyards and factories of our country – have made Afrikaans a unique hybridisation that finds unity as a Creole language which is the verbalisation of the complex world in which we move.”3 “Afrikaans is the living and changing and change-making outcome of diverging and at times conflicting histories. These diverse origins characterised by adaptation, conquest, subjugation, oppression, survival, resistance, transformation – descended from European dialects, Malay, Portuguese, seafarer language, Khoi languages, Arabic Afrikaans, the Qur’an and the Bible, the courts and churches and kitchens and hospitals and vineyards and factories of our country – have made Afrikaans a unique hybridisation that finds unity as a Creole language which is the verbalisation of the complex world in which we move.”3 2 Rabie Polemika (John Malherbe (Pty) Limited, Cape Town 1966) at 106. Jan Rabie is recognised as a liberal Afrikaans writer of the 1960s and 1970s. He was born in 1920 and passed away in 2001. 2 Rabie Polemika (John Malherbe (Edms) Beperk, Kaapstad 1966) op 106. Jan Rabie word beskou as ‘n liberale Afrikaanse skrywer van die 1960s en 1970s. Hy was in 1920 gebore en is oorlede in 2001. 3 Breytenbach’s supporting and expert affidavit at para 8, as cited in Gelyke Kanse v Chairperson, Senate of the University of Stellenbosch [2019] ZACC 38; 2020 (1) SA 368 (CC); 2019 (12) BCLR 1479 (CC) at para 87. Breytenbach was born in 1939 and is known for his fierce opposition to apartheid, having been imprisoned by that regime from 1975 to 1982 on terrorism charges. The translation from the original Afrikaans is by Froneman J in his separate concurrence in Gelyke Kanse. 4 se en ondersteunende 3 Breytenbach deskundige eedsverklaring in para 8, soos aangehaal in Gelyke Kanse v Chairperson of the Senate of the University of Stellenbosch [2019] ZACC 38; 2020 (1) SA 368 (CC); 2019 (12) BCLR 1479 (CC), in para 87. Breytenbach was in 1939 gebore en is bekend vir sy hewige teenstand teen apartheid, waarvoor hy van 1975 tot 1982 tronkstraf uitgedien het, nadat hy deur die apartheid regime gevonnis is op aanklagte van terrorisme. Die vertaling vanaf die oorspronklike Afrikaans is deur Froneman R in sy aparte samestemmende uitspraak in Gelyke Kanse. [2] This stark contrast between three white Afrikaans writers of different eras and [2] Hierdie skerp kontras tussen drie wit outlooks bears testimony to the troubled, Afrikaanse skrywers van verskillende warped discourse around Afrikaans. Today, tydvakke en uitkyke, is tekenend van die “the majority of Afrikaans speakers are troebel, verwronge diskoers aangaande black, and it is spoken as a first language by Afrikaans. Vandag is “die meerderheid van people from multiple ethnic and social Afrikaanssprekendes swart, en die taal word backgrounds”.4 as eerste taal gebesig deur mense van veelvuldige etniese en maatskaplike [3] This case concerns a decision to agtergronde”.4 discontinue Afrikaans as a language of teaching and learning at South Africa’s [3] Hierdie saak handel oor die besluit largest university. It is the latest in a trilogy deur Suid-Afrika se grootste universiteit om of cases relating to policy decisions by die onderrig en leer in Afrikaans te staak. Dit universities to remove Afrikaans as a is die nuutste in ’n trilogie van sake wat medium of teaching and learning. In the verband hou met beleidsbesluite deur first, University of the Free State,5 this Court universiteite om Afrikaans as medium van had to decide “whether that university acted onderrig en leer te verwyder. In die eerste consistently with its obligations in terms of een, University of the Free State,5 moes section 29(2) of the Constitution in adopting hierdie Hof beslis “of daardie universiteit 4 Willemse “The Afrikaans Cultural Expressions of the Powerless and Subjugated” in George (ed) A Companion to African Literatures (John Wiley & Sons Limited, Hoboken 2021) (Willemse I) at 252. See also Willemse The Hidden Histories of Afrikaans (9 October 2015), available at http://www.up.ac.za/media/shared/45/willemse_mistra- 20151105-2_2.zp80127.pdf (Willemse II), where he states: “Today six in ten of the almost seven million Afrikaans speakers in South Africa are estimated to be black (in the generic sense of the word), a figure that will increase significantly in the next decade.” indications all by 4 Willemse “The Afrikaans Cultural Expressions of the Powerless and Subjugated” George (uitg) A Companion to African Literatures (John Wiley & Sons Limited, Hoboken 2021) (Willemse I) op 252. Sien ook: Willemse: The Hidden Histories of Afrikaans (9 Oktober 2015), beskikbaar by http://www.up.ac.za/media/shared/45/willemse_mistra- 20151105-2_2.zp80127.pdf (Willemse II), waar hy aandui dat: “Today six in ten of the almost seven million Afrikaans speakers in South Africa are estimated to be black (in the generic sense of the word), a figure that will increase significantly in the next decade.” indications all by 5 AfriForum v University of the Free State [2017] ZACC 48; 2018 (2) SA 185 (CC); 2018 (4) BCLR 387 (CC) (University of the Free State). 5 AfriForum v University of the Free State [2017] ZACC 48; 2018 (2) SA 185 (CC); 2018 (4) BCLR 387 (CC) (University of the Free State). 5 a policy that phases out Afrikaans as a konsekwent opgetree het met sy verpligtinge co-equal medium of instruction with ingevolge artikel 29(2) van die Grondwet, English”.6 Next, in Gelyke Kanse,7 the deur ’n beleid te aanvaar wat Afrikaans central issue was whether Stellenbosch uitfaseer as ’n gelyke onderrig medium met University’s 2016 language policy that Engels”.6 Daarna, in Gelyke Kanse,7 was die created three language specifications – kernvraag of die Universiteit van parallel, dual and single medium, thereby Stellenbosch se 2016 taalbeleid wat drie taal removing the previous dominance of spesifikasies vestig – parallel, dubbel Afrikaans – was an infringement of the right medium en enkel medium, en sodoende of Afrikaans students to mother tongue wegdoen met Afrikaans se oorheersendheid education. And now, in this matter, this – inbreuk maak op Afrikaanssprekende Court is asked to determine whether the studente se reg op moedertaal onderrig. En decision to adopt a new language policy in nou, in hierdie saak, word hierdie Hof 2016 by the third applicant, the University of versoek om te bepaal of die besluit geneem South Africa (UNISA): (a) passes in 2016 deur die derde applikant, die constitutional muster; (b) was rational; and Universiteit van Suid-Afrika (UNISA), om (c) complied with procedural prescripts. ’n nuwe taalbeleid te aanvaar ten einde die This new language policy aimed to enhance status van inheemse tale te bevorder, en the status of indigenous African languages, terselfdertyd Afrikaans uitfaseer en wegdoen while also phasing out Afrikaans and met die waarborg dat kursusse in beide removing the guarantee that courses be Afrikaans en Engels aangebied sal word, offered in both Afrikaans and English. (a) grondwetlik; (b) rasioneel was; en (c) of die prosedurele voorskrifte nagevolg was. [4] This Court’s decisions in Gelyke Kanse and University of the Free State do [4] Hierdie Hof se beslissings in Gelyke not signal an acceptance that the Afrikaans Kanse en University of the Free State is glad language must ineluctably be diminished as nie aanduidend van ’n aanvaarding dat a language of teaching and learning in our Afrikaans onafwendbaar afgeskaal moet 6 Id at para 22. 6 Id in para 22. 7 Gelyke Kanse above n 3 at paras 1-6. 7 Gelyke Kanse n 3 hierbo in paragrawe 1-6. 6 country’s institutions of higher education. word as ’n taal van onderrig en leer in ons Apart from the fact that each case must be land se hoër onderwysinstellings nie. Buiten decided on its facts, the role of Afrikaans in die beginsel dat elke saak op sy eie feite our institutions and civic life cannot be beoordeel moet word, kan Afrikaans se rol in reduced to a simplistic narrative of ons instellings en gemeenskapslewe nie hegemony and decline. We must resist such bloot verminder word tot ’n vereenvoudigde simplistic narratives, many of which feed on weergawe van oorheersing en agteruitgang false myths about the origins and nie. Ons moet waak teen sulke development of the Afrikaans language. vereenvoudigde weergawes, baie waarvan [5] With this in mind, before dealing ontstaan en ontwikkeling van die Afrikaanse ontaard uit valse mites aangaande die with the present challenge to UNISA’s taal. revised language policy, the true origins and development of Afrikaans bear [5] Op hierdie grondslag, alvorens consideration. This is necessary to correct oorweging geskenk word aan die the false narrative concerning its origins, onderhawige aanslag teen UNISA se development and present position in our gewysigde taalbeleid, verg die ware society. oorsprong en ontwikkeling van Afrikaans eers betragting van naderby, ten einde die Afrikaans in proper perspective onegte weergawe van die taal se oorsprong, [6] Chinua Achebe reminded us that “until the lions have their own historians, the history of the hunt will always glorify the hunter”.8 And so it is too with the history of ontwikkeling en heersende plek in ons samelewing by te lê en reg te stel. Afrikaans in behoorlike perspektief the origins and development of the [6] Chinua Achebe het ons herinner dat Afrikaans language. “totdat die leeus hulle eie geskiedenis skrywers het, sal die geskiedenis van die jag 8 Chinua Achebe was a celebrated Nigerian poet, writer and academic, the author of Things Fall Apart, generally considered to be the most widely read book in modern African literature. See Brooks “Chinua Achebe, The Art of Fiction No. 139” (1994) 133 The Paris Review. 8 Chinua Achebe was ‘n gesogte Nigeriese digter, skrywer en akademikus, die skrywer van “Things Fall Apart”, wat algemeen beskou word as die boek wat die meeste gelees is in moderne Afrika literatuur. Sien Brooks “Chinua Achebe, The Art of Fiction No. 139” (1994) 133 The Paris Review. 7 [7] Afrikaans is a creole language that altyd die jagter vereer”.8 En so is dit ook met developed during the 19th century under die geskiedenis van die oorsprong en colonialism in South Africa.9 It is a ontwikkeling van die Afrikaanse taal. language that was once spoken by “peasants, the urban proletariat, whatever their ethnic [7] Afrikaans is ’n kreoolse taal wat background, and even the middle class of ontwikkel het gedurende die 19e eeu onder civil servants, traders and teachers”.10 kolonialisme in Suidelike Afrika.9 Dit is ’n [8] Afrikaans is a veritable potpourri of grondbewoners, die stedelike werkersklas en different languages, melded into what has selfs middelklas staatsamptenare, handelaars taal wat destyds gepraat is deur eenvoudige been referred to in this Court as “one of the en onderwysers.10 cultural treasures of South African national life, widely spoken and deeply implanted, [8] Afrikaans is ’n klassieke mengelmoes the vehicle of outstanding literature, the van verskillende tale, saamgesmelt tot, bearer of a rich scientific and legal waarna daar in hierdie Hof verwys is as, “een vocabulary and possibly the most creole or van die kulturele skatte van Suid-Afrikaanse ‘rainbow’ of all South African tongues”.11 A nasionale bestaan, wat wyd gebesig word en great injustice is being done to Afrikaans diep gesetel is, die medium van uitnemende through the contorted hegemonic white literatuur, die draer van ’n ryk wetenskaplike history12 that has been “inculcated by en regs-woordeskat en moontlik die mees 9 Giliomee “The Rise and Possible Demise of Afrikaans as Public Language” (2004) Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 25 (Giliomee II) at 25-7. 9 Giliomee “The rise and possible demise of Afrikaans as public language” (2004) Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 25 (Giliomee II) op 26-7. 10 Willemse II above n 4 at 3-4. 10 Willemse II n 4 hierbo op 3-4. 11 Per Sachs J in Gauteng Provincial Legislature: In re Gauteng School Education Bill of 1995 [1996] ZACC 4; 1996 (3) SA 165 (CC); 1996 (4) BCLR 537 (CC) (Gauteng Provincial Legislature) at para 49. 11 Per Sachs R in Gauteng Provincial Legislature In re: Gauteng School Education Bill of 1995 [1996] ZACC 4; 1996 (3) SA 165 (CC); 1996 (4) BCLR 537 (CC) (Gauteng Provincial Legislature) in para 49. 12 Van der Waal “Creolisation and Purity: Afrikaans Language Politics in Post-Apartheid Times” (2012) African Studies 71 446 (Van der Waal) at 449 and 456. See also Giliomee II above n 9 at 27; Van Heerden Afrikaaps: A Celebratory Protest Against the Racialised Hegemony of thesis, Stellenbosch (Master’s “Pure” Afrikaans University, 2016) (Van Heerden) at 1, 24, 33, 35, 88-9. Van der Waal states that the creole origin of Afrikaans is contested. Many linguists minimised the influence of 12 Van der Waal “Creolisation and Purity: Afrikaans Language Politics in Post-Apartheid Times” African Studies 71 446 (Van der Waal) op 449 en 456; sien ook Giliomee n 9 hierbo op 27; Van Heerden Afrikaaps: a celebratory protest against the racialised hegemony of tesis, Universiteit van ‘pure’ Afrikaans Stellenbosch, 2016) (Van Heerden) op 1, 24, 33, 35, 88-9. Van der Waal verklaar dat die kreoolse oorsprong van Afrikaans betwis word. Verskeie taalkundiges het bruin (Meesters 8 Afrikaner Christian national education, kreoolse of ‘reënboog’ van alle Suid- propaganda and the media”13 and Afrikaanse tale”.11 ‘’n Groot onreg word shamefully overlooks its equally important Afrikaans aangedoen deur die verwronge black history.14 oorheersende wit geskiedenis12 wat “ingeburger is deur Afrikaner Christelike [9] During the era of Afrikaner nasionale onderwys, propaganda en die nationalism,15 a time when the language was media”13 en wat skaamteloos Afrikaans se used as a weapon for ethnic mobilisation, ewe belangrike swart geskiedenis Afrikaans became a cultural symbol of misken.14141 “Afrikanerness” and national unity.16 Afrikaans was deployed “to secure power in people of colour on Afrikaans and Giliomee describes the contested existence of Afrikaans (what I refer to as “white” history) as follows (Giliomee II above n 9): “Afrikaans was, in its essence, a dialect of Dutch that had over time undergone a limited measure of creolisation or deviation from the basic Dutch structure.” mense se invloed op Afrikaans tot ‘n minimum beperk en Giliomee beskryf die betwiste bestaan van Afrikaans (wat ek die “wit” geskiedenis noem) soos volg (Giliomee II n 9 hierbo): “Afrikaans was, in its essence, a dialect of Dutch that had over time undergone a limited measure of creolisation or deviation from the basic Dutch structure.” 13 Willemse II above n 4 at 1. 13 Willemse II n 4 hierbo op 1. 14 I refer to the creolisation theory of Afrikaans as the “black” history of the language, which includes the stories of all people of colour that are side-lined from the dominant discourse. See Groenewald Slawe, Khoekhoen en Nederlandse Pidgins aan die Kaap, CA. 1590-1720: ’n Kritiese Ondersoek na die Sosiohistoriese Grondslae van die Konvergensieteorie oor die Ontstaan van Afrikaans (Master’s thesis, University of Cape Town, 2002) at 42-3; Van der Waal above n 12 at 449; Willemse II above n 4 at 3-4; Conradie and Groenewald “Die Ontstaan en Vestiging van Afrikaans” in Carstens and Bosman Die Ontstaan en Vestiging van Afrikaans (Van Schaik, Pretoria 2014) (Conradie and Groenewald) at 28; Roberge “The formation of Afrikaans” Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics 27 at 34- 5. 14 Ek verwys na die kreoliseringsteorie van Afrikaans as die “swart” geskiedenis, wat die stories van alle mense van kleur wat opsy gestoot is vanaf die oorheersende diskoers insluit. Sien Groenewald Slawe, Khoekhoen en Nederlandse Pidgins aan die Kaap, CA. 1590-1720: ’n Kritiese ondersoek na die Sosiohistoriese Grondslae van die Konvergensieteorie oor die ontstaan van Afrikaans (Meesters tesis, Universiteit van Kaapstad, 2002) op 42-3; Van der Waal n 12 hierbo op 449; Willemse II n 4 hierbo op 3-4; Conradie and Groenewald “Die ontstaan en vestiging van Afrikaans” in Carstens en Bosman Die Ontstaan en Vestiging van Afrikaans (Van Schaik, Pretoria 2014) (Conradie and Groenewald) op 28; en Roberge “The formation of Afrikaans” Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics 27 op 34-5. 15 The era of Afrikaner nationalism arose towards the end of the 19th century (Giliomee II above n 9 at 30). 15 Die era van Afrikaner nasionalisme het teen die einde van die 19de eeu ontstaan. (Giliomee II n 9 hierbo op 30). 16 Ponelis The development of Afrikaans (Peter Lang, New York 1993) at 52-3 and Van Heerden above n 12 at 22, citing Pokpas and Van Gensen “Afrikaans en Ideologie in Taalbeplanning: ’n Stryd van Standpunte” in Webb Afrikaans ná apartheid (Van Schaik, Pretoria 1992) (Pokpas and Van Gensen) at 170-1. 16 Ponelis The development of Afrikaans (Peter Lang, New York 1993) op 52-3 en Van Heerden n 12 hierbo op 22 met verwysing na Pokpas en Van Gensen “Afrikaans en Ideologie in Taalbeplanning: ’n Stryd van Standpunte” in Webb Afrikaans ná apartheid (Van Schaik, Pretoria 1992) (Pokpas en Van Gensen) op 170-1. 9 the hands of an exclusive group” and [9] Gedurende die tydvak van Afrikaner became associated with the nasionalisme,15 ’n tyd toe die taal gebruik is “marginalisation” and “exclusion” of as ’n wapentuig vir etniese mobilisering, het “uncivilised” Afrikaans speakers.17 Afrikaans ’n kulturele simbool van “Afrikanerskap” en nasionale eenheid [10] There is a compelling argument that geword.16 Afrikaans was aangewend “om “the endeavour to establish Afrikaans as mag te vestig in die hande van ’n ‘white’ laid the foundation for ‘racist eksklusiewe groep” en was vereenselwig met nationalism, the rise of Afrikaner hegemony, die “marginalisering” en “uitsluiting” van and the politics of apartheid’”.18 As “onbeskaafde” Afrikaans-sprekendes.17 Willemse explains: “In the course of the 20th century, Afrikaner nationalism claimed proprietorship of Afrikaans, the first language of persons from divergent backgrounds, to such an extent that [10] Daar is ’n oorredende betoog dat die strewe na “die vestiging van Afrikaans as ‘wit’ die grondslag daarstel vir ‘rassistiese nasionalisme, die toename van Afrikaner oorheersing, en die politiek van a discussion of it also becomes a apartheid’”.18 Soos Willemse verduidelik: discussion about the exclusion of a significant percentage of Afrikaans speakers. . . . Historically, [Afrikaans, as a body of knowledge,] bears the traces of conscious disregard and even continued suppression of a “In the course of the 20th century, Afrikaner nationalism claimed proprietorship of Afrikaans, the first language of persons from divergent backgrounds, to such an extent that a discussion of it also becomes a discussion about the exclusion of a significant percentage of Afrikaans 17 Pokpas and Van Gensen id at 171. What is meant by “uncivilised” Afrikaans speakers is black Afrikaans speakers. 17 Pokpas en Van Gensen id op 171. Met “onbeskaafde” Afrikaanssprekendes word swart Afrikaanssprekendes bedoel. 18 Van Heerden above n 12 at 23 referring to Hendricks “The Potential Advantage of an Egalitarian View of the Varieties of Afrikaans” in Prah (ed) Mainstreaming Afrikaans Regional Varieties (Centre for Advanced Studies of African Society, Cape Town 2012) at 51. 18 Van Heerden n 12 hierbo op 23 met verwysing na Hendricks “The potential advantage of an egalitarian view of the varieties of Afrikaans” in Prah (uitg) Mainstreaming Afrikaans regional varieties (Sentrum vir Gevorderde Studies van die Afrikaanse Samelewing, Kaapstad 2012) op 51. 10 considerable portion of the speakers. . . . Historically, Afrikaans language community.”19 [Afrikaans, as a body of knowledge,] [11] The history of Afrikaans is multi-faceted. The establishment and existence of the language cannot be attributed to a single race. Afrikaans speakers were of different languages, races, nationalities, and social classes.20 This black history teaches us that Afrikaans is more than just the language of “racists, oppressors and unreconstructed nationalists”, but instead that it “bears the imprint of a fierce tradition of anti-imperialism, anti- colonialism, of an all-embracing humanism and anti-apartheid activism”.21 [12] Afrikaans evolved mainly from Dutch, Malay, Portuguese, Khoi languages, and Arabic-Afrikaans.22 When the Dutch colonialists landed at the Cape of Good Hope in 1652 and established a refreshment station there, they were compelled to interact bears the traces of conscious disregard and even continued suppression of a considerable portion of the Afrikaans language community.”19 [11] Die geskiedenis van Afrikaans is veelvuldig in sy fasette. Die vestiging en bestaan van die taal kan nie bloot toegeskryf word aan een enkele rassegroep nie. Afrikaanssprekendes was afkomstig vanaf verskillende rasse, nasionaliteite en sosiale stande.20 Hierdie swart geskiedenis dui aan dat Afrikaans meer is as bloot die taal van “rassiste, onderdrukkers en ongekorrigeerde nasionaliste”, maar eerder die “indruk dra van ‘n vurige tradisie van anti-imperialisme, anti-kolonialisme, van ’n alles omvattende menswees en anti-apartheid aktivisme”.21 [12] Afrikaans het grotendeels ontwikkel vanaf Hollands, Maleis, Portugees, Khoi 19 Van Heerden above n 12 at 23-4, citing Willemse “Considering a more multi-faceted Afrikaans” in Prah id, at 65. 19 Van Heerden n 12 hierbo op 23-4 met verwysing na Willemse “Considering a more multi-faceted Afrikaans” in Prah, id op 65. 20 Van der Waal above n 12 at 449. See also Giliomee II above n 9 at 25. 20 Van der Waal n 12 hierbo op 449. Sien ook Giliomee II n 9 hierbo op 25. 21 Willemse II above n 4 at 1 and Van Heerden above n 12 at 31, 66-7, 133. 21 Willemse II n 4 hierbo op 1 en Van Heerden n 12 hierbo op 31, 66-7, 133. 22 See Conradie and Groenewald above n 14 at 46. See also the theory of DC Hesseling as described in Van Heerden above n 12 at 82-3; Roberge above n 14 at 34-5; and Giliomee II above n 9 at 27. 22 Sien Conradie en Groenewald n 14 hierbo op 46. Sien in ook die Van Heerden n 12 hierbo op 82-3; Roberge n 14 hierbo op 34-5; en Giliomee II n 9 hierbo op 27. teorie van DC Hesseling soos beskryf 11 with Southern Africa’s first peoples, the tale, en Arabiese Afrikaans.22142Toe die Khoisan, particularly for purposes of trade.23 Hollandse kolonialiste in 1652 by die Kaap Later, probably around the early 1700s, die Goeie Hoop geland en ’n verversingstasie enslaved people from East Africa and East daar gevestig het, was hulle genoodsaak om Asia were brought to the Cape as forced interaksie te hê met Suider-Afrika se eerste labour.24 The colonisers forced the Khoisan bewoners, die Khoisan, vernaamlik ten einde people and the enslaved Eastern people to handel te dryf.23 Later, moontlik teen die speak Dutch, thus manifesting the first roots vroee 1700’s, is slawe vanaf Oos-Afrika en of the Afrikaans language.25 Afrikaans Oos-Asië na die Kaap gebring as dwang linguists all agree that the Khoisan and the arbeid.24 Die kolonialiste het die Khoisan enslaved people played important roles in mense en die Oosterse slawe gedwing om the origins and development of Afrikaans – Hollands te praat, en sodoende die eerste they only differ on whether their roles were grondlegging van Afrikaans bewerkstellig.25 pivotal or less substantial.26 Afrikaanse letterkundiges is dit eens dat die [13] The Cape Muslim community, that gespeel het in die oorsprong en ontwikkeling consisted primarily of enslaved people van Afrikaans – hulle verskil slegs of daardie Khoisan en die slawe belangrike rolle brought to the Cape from the Indonesian 23 Van Heerden above n 12 at 81. 23 Van Heerden n 12 hierbo op 81. 24 Roberge above n 14 at 53 and Conradie and Groenewald above n 14 at 39. The Netherlands gained control of the eastern parts of India when they conquered the Portuguese ruling there during the 1650s. 24 Roberge n 14 hierbo op 53 en Conradie en Groenewald n 14 hierbo op 39. Nederland het beheer oor die oostelike dele van Indië verkry toe hulle die regerende Portugese daar in die 1650s verslaan het. “Hip Hop Masala” 25 Van Heerden above n 12 at 34. See also Valley and Valley at http://kaganof.com/kagablog/?s=hip+hop+masala, who state that, “Afrikaans developed as a bridging language to ease communication between the indigenous people, imported slaves and their masters.” available (2010) Hop Masala” 25 Van Heerden n 12 hierbo op 34. Sien ook Valley en Valley “Hip by http://kaganof.com/kagablog/?s=hip+hop+masala, wat verklaar dat “Afrikaans het ontwikkel as ’n oorbruggingstaal om die kommunikasie tussen die inheemse volk, die ingevoerde slawe en hul meesters te vergemaklik”. beskikbaar (2010) 26 Giliomee II above n 9 at 27 and Groenewald above n 14 at 4. Scholars draw a distinction between the Philologists’ school of thought and the Creolists. The former takes the view that Afrikaans developed primarily from dialectical Dutch, with minor influence from the Khoisan and the enslaved people. The latter school of thought, on the other hand, opines that the development of Afrikaans was largely due to the influence of the enslaved people and the indigenous Khoisan people. 26 Giliomee II n 9 hierbo op 27 en Groenewald n 14 hierbo op 4. Kenners tref onderskeid tussen die Filoloë se denkrigting en die van die Kreoliste. Die eersgenoemde is van mening dat Afrikaans hoofsaaklik uit dialektiese Nederlands ontwikkel het, met geringe invloed van die Khoisan en die slawe. Die laasgenoemde denkskool is weer die mening toegedaan dat die ontwikkeling van Afrikaans grootliks te wyte was aan die invloed van die slawe en die inheemse Khoi- en San-mense. 12 archipelago, Bengal, the South Coast of rolle deurslaggewend of bloot minder India, Ceylon (now known as Sri Lanka) and omvattend was.26143 the East Coast of Africa (including Madagascar), adopted Afrikaans as their [13] Die Kaapse Moslemgemeenskap, wat first language during the 1830s.27 This form grootliks bestaan het uit slawe wat na die of Afrikaans was presented in Arabic text Kaap gebring is vanaf die Indiese and was recognised as Arabic-Afrikaans.28 eilandgroep, Bengalie, die Suidkus van Recently, the role that Arabic played in the Indië, Ceylon (tans bekend as Sri Lanka) en development of Afrikaans has been die Ooskus van Afrika (insluitende recognised.29 Madagaskar), het Afrikaans aangeneem as hul eerste taal gedurende die [14] Arabic-Afrikaans was predominantly 1830s.27144Hierdie vorm van Afrikaans is used in religious contexts (the Islamic Cape voorgehou in Arabiese teks en is erken as Muslim community studied the Qur’an that Arabiese Afrikaans.28145Die rol wat Arabies was written in Arabic).30 One of the first in die ontwikkeling van Afrikaans vervul het, writings in Afrikaans emanated in 1860 from het onlangs erkenning ontvang.29 a Cape Town madrasah,31 where a descendant of enslaved people copied a [14] Arabiese Afrikaans is oorheersend gebesig binne godsdienstige raamwerke (die 27 Groenewald above n 14 at 4. It is pointed out that, as long ago as 1897, Hesseling – widely recognised as the founder of the history of Afrikaans linguistics – alluded to the pivotal role that enslaved people played in the development of Afrikaans. 27 Groenewald n 14 hierbo op 4. Dit word daarop gewys dat Hesseling, wat al sedert 1897 algemeen erken word as die stigter van die geskiedenis van die Afrikaanse taalkunde, verwys het na die deurslaggewende rol wat slawe in die ontwikkeling van Afrikaans gespeel het. 28 In 1951, Van Selms discovered the role that Arabic played in the development of Afrikaans. See Davids and Willemse The Afrikaans of the Cape Muslims (Stigting vir die Bemagtiging van Afrikaans, Bellville 2018) (Davids and Willemse) at 11. 28 In 1951 ontdek Van Selms die rol wat Arabies in die ontwikkeling van Afrikaans gespeel het; sien Davids en Willemse “The Afrikaans of the Cape Muslims” (Stigting vir die Bemagtiging van Afrikaans, Bellville 2018) (Davids en Willemse) op 11. 29 Id. The authors opine that the reason why the Arabic influence was only discovered in the mid-20th century was the lack of Afrikaans students and academia who could read and understand Arabic. 29 Id. Die skrywers is van mening dat die rede waarom die Arabiese invloed eers in die middel van die 20ste eeu ontdek is, te wyte is aan die gebrek aan Afrikaanse studente en akademici wat Arabies kon lees en verstaan. 30 Conradie and Groenewald above n 14 at 52 and Davids and Willemse above n 28 at 11-3, 16. 30 Conradie en Groenewald n 14 hierbo op 52 en Davids en Willemse n 28 hierbo op 11-3, 16. 31 A madrasah is an Islamic educational institution. 31 ’n Madrassa is ’n Islamitiese opvoedkundige instelling. 13 prayer in his exercise book.32 That prayer, Islamitiese Kaapse Moslem gemeenskap het in Arabic script, closely resembles modern die Koran bestudeer wat in Arabies geskryf day Afrikaans.33 One of the oldest Afrikaans is).30 Een van die eerste Afrikaanse geskrifte books was authored prior to 1867 by het in 1860 ontspruit by ’n madrassa in Abubaker Effendi and was titled Kaapstad,31 waar ’n afstammeling van slawe Bayān al-Din.34 This guidebook to Islam ’n gebed in sy skryfboek afgeskryf het.32 was written in Arabic-Afrikaans, a language Daardie gebed, in Arabiese skrif, het ‘n that was the bearer of intimate thoughts and nabye ooreenkoms met hedendaagse religion of the literate Cape Muslim Afrikaans.33 Een van die oudste Afrikaanse community.35 boeke is geskryf voor 1867 deur Abubaker Effendi met die titel van Bayan al- [15] Van Heerden notes that the Din.34 Hierdie handleiding oor Islam is contribution of Arabic-Afrikaans occurred geskryf in Arabiese Afrikaans, ’n taal wat die before the time that Afrikaans was draer was van die intieme gedagtes en appropriated as a “white” language: godsdiens van die geletterde Kaapse Moslem gemeenskap.35 “Before the appropriation of the creole language Afrikaans by ‘patriotic male European colonists’ during the late nineteenth century, ‘men introduced the creole language into the public sphere’ via ‘[t]he first book in Afrikaans . . . written [15] Van Heerden dui aan dat die bydrae van Arabiese Afrikaans plaasgevind het voordat Afrikaans toege-eien is as ’n wit taal: 32 Willemse II above n 4 at 1. 32 Willemse II n 4 hierbo op 1 33 Id at 1-3. Willemse mentions that an even earlier madrasah exercise book, dating back to 1806, was discovered by the writer Davids, in his path-breaking The Afrikaans of the Cape Muslims (above n 28). That would be the earliest known writing in Afrikaans. 33 Id op 1-3. Willemse noem dat ’n selfs ouer madrassa- oefenboek deur die skrywer Davids ontdek is, in sy baanbrekerswerk The Afrikaans of the Cape Muslims (n 28 hierbo). Dit sou dus die oudste Afrikaanse geskrif wees. 34 Willemse II above n 4 at 3. 34 Willemse II n 4 hierbo op 3. 35 Id. 35 Id. 36 Van Heerden above n 12 at 35, citing Shell Children of Bondage: A Social History of the Slave Society at the Cape of Good Hope (University Press of New England, Hanover 1994). 36 Van Heerden n 12 hierbo op 35, met aanhaling van Shell Children of bondage: A social history of the slave society at the Cape of Good Hope (University Press of New England, Hanover 1994). 14 by an imam, a slave descendant’. “Before the appropriation of the However, ‘[slave] owners would creole language Afrikaans by later adopt [Afrikaans]. . . and call it ‘patriotic male European colonists’ their own’.”36 Further, Van Heerden notes that: “The literature first also came from the black community. If we go back to the early Muslim scholars in the Cape, the teachers, who taught at the madrassas. This is where Afrikaans, written with Arabic script, first emerged. It’s long before the Bible. The Bible is translated in the second decade of the 1900s. We’re talking now about the last decade of the 1700s, and the first two decades of the 1800s, is where Islamic scholars, teachers, are teaching the children in Afrikaans, in phonetic Afrikaans, using Arabic script.”37 [16] By 1870, the mixture of languages in during the late nineteenth century, ‘men introduced the creole language into the public sphere’ via ‘[t]he first book in Afrikaans. . . written by an imam, a slave descendant’. However, ‘[slave] owners would later adopt [Afrikaans]. . . and call it their own”. Van Heerden dui verder aan dat: “The literature first also came from the black community. If we go back to the early Muslim scholars in the Cape, the teachers, who taught at the madrassas. This is where Afrikaans, written with Arabic script, first emerged. It’s long before the Bible. The Bible is translated in the second decade of the 1900s. We’re talking now about the last decade of the 1700s, and the first two decades of the Cape was recognised as a distinct the 1800s, is where Islamic scholars, language – Afrikaans.38 It is reported that by teachers, are teaching the children in the end of the 19th century, Afrikaans, as a written medium, experienced a decline.39 As a spoken language, it suffered against the Afrikaans, in phonetic Afrikaans, using Arabic script.”37 37 Van Heerden id at 114. 38 Id at 5. 37 Van Heerden id op 114. 38 Id op 5. 39 Giliomee II above n 9 at 29. 39 Giliomee II n 9 hierbo op 29. 40 Id. 40 Id. 15 dominance of English and Dutch.40 [16] Teen 1870 is die mengsel van tale in Following the South African War of die Kaap erken as ‘n aparte taal - Afrikaans.38 1899-1902 (Anglo-Boer War), Britain Daar is opgeteken dat Afrikaans teen die colonised the remainder of South Africa (the einde van die 19de eeu agteruit gegaan het.39 Orange Free State and Transvaal were Afrikaans as voertaal het gely onder die Afrikaner Republics with Dutch as the oorheersing van Engels en Hollands.40 Na official language), and English was die Suid-Afrikaanse oorlog vanaf 1899 tot introduced as the official language.41 In 1902 (Anglo-Boere oorlog), het Brittanje die 1909, Dutch and English were recognised by res van Suid-Afrika gekolonialiseer (die the South Africa Act42 as languages of equal Oranje Vrystaat en Transvaal was Afrikaner force.43 The struggle to replace Dutch with republieke met Hollands as die amptelike Afrikaans ensued in the 20th century. At the taal) en Engels is ingestel as die amptelike forefront was an obscure attorney and poet taal.41 In 1909 is Hollands en Engels deur die who contributed immensely to the Suid-Afrika Wet42 erken as gelykwigtige development of Afrikaans literature and tale.43 Die strewe na die vervanging van cultural history, CJ Langenhoven, referred Hollands met Afrikaans het ’n aanvang to earlier.44 However, as Giliomee notes, geneem gedurende die 20ste eeu. Aan die Langenhoven erred grievously when he voorgrond was ’n onbekende prokureur en described Afrikaans as a “white man’s digter wat beduidend bygedra het tot die language”.45 ontwikkeling van Afrikaanse letterkunde en kulturele geskiedenis, CJ Langenhoven, na [17] During the twentieth century, wie vroeër verwys is.44 Maar, soos Giliomee activists of Afrikaans used the aanteken, Langenhoven het gruwelik National Party (NP) as its vehicle to drive gefouteer toe hy Afrikaans beskryf het as die their cause.46 Most activists, like “witman se taal”.45 41 Id. 42 South Africa Act, 1909. 43 Id at section 137. 44 Giliomee II above n 9 at 34. 45 Id at 35. 46 Id at 36. 41 Id. 42 Suid-Afrika Wet, 1909. 43 Id in artikel 137. 44 Giliomee II n 9 hierbo op 34. 45 Id op 35. 46 Id op 36. 16 Langenhoven, chose to fight the battle for Afrikaans under the “white” flag and they [17] Gedurende die twintigste eeu, het established a racial community whose Afrikaanse aktiviste die Nasionale Party struggle for the advancement of Afrikaans (NP) aangewend as die middel om hul saak was subordinate to the entrenchment of te bedryf.46 Die meeste aktiviste, soos white supremacy, instead of forming a Langenhoven, het verkies om die stryd vir language community whose social identity Afrikaans te voer onder die “wit” vlag. In was shaped by the struggle for the navolging daarvan het hulle ’n acceptance of Afrikaans as a public language rassegemeenskap gevestig wie se stryd vir enjoying similar status as English.47 die bevordering van Afrikaans ondergeskik Giliomee considered the consequences of was aan die vestiging van wit oorheersing, this thinking, stating as follows: instede daarvan om ’n taalgemeenskap te stig “[T]he salience of race had to diminish and the creed ‘Die taal is gans die volk’ (the language constitutes the entire people), which activists often cited, had to be made wie se maatskaplike identiteit gevorm is deur die stryd vir die aanvaarding van Afrikaans as ’n openbare taal met soortgelyke status as Engels.47 Giliomee het die nagevolge van hierdie gesindheid oorweeg, en die volgende a reality across racial boundaries.”48 gesê: [18] The NP pursued a racially motivated agenda that eventually led to the “historic exclusivity of the Afrikaners, their culture and their language”49 and the stance against Afrikaans by the black citizens of our country. Afrikaans became the language of “[T]he salience of race had to diminish and the creed ‘Die taal is gans die volk’ (the language constitutes the entire people), which activists often cited, had to be made a reality across racial boundaries.”48 the oppressor: “the medium used when white [18] Die NP het ’n rasgemotiveerde policemen arrested [b]lack pass offenders or agenda bedryf wat uiteindelik aanleiding 47 Id. 48 Id. 49 Id at 39. 47 Id. 48 Id. 49 Id op 39. 17 when white civil servants ordered [black gegee het tot die “geskiedkundige people] or ‘coloured’ people out of their eksklusiwiteit van die Afrikaners, hul kultuur houses in racially mixed slum areas”.50 en hul taal”49 en die standpunt teen Afrikaans Afrikaans was forced upon the black wat deur ons land se swart burgers ingeneem community who strongly resisted and, sadly, is. Afrikaans het die onderdrukker se taal the exclusive “white” history replaced the geword: “die medium wat gebruik is forgotten “black” history of our language. wanneer wit polisiemanne swart pas oortreders gearresteer het, of wanneer wit [19] It bears emphasis that, to staatsamptenare [swart mense] of simplistically style Afrikaans as having a ‘gekleurde’ mense gelas het om hul huise te one-dimensional history and existence as verlaat in ras vermengde krotbuurtes”.50 “the language of the whites”, and as “the Afrikaans was afgeforseer op die swart language of the oppressor”, is entirely gemeenskap wat dit sterk teengestaan het en, misconceived and flies in the face of the true betreurenswaardig, het die eksklusiewe history of its origins and development “wit” geskiedenis die vergete “swart" sketched above. As Valley and Valley geskiedenis van die taal vervang. explain: “[W]hile [b]lack students in Soweto were protesting against the use of Afrikaans as the language of instruction, Afrikaans-speaking ‘coloured’ youth joined in the fight [19] Dit moet beklemtoon word dat die vereenvoudigde aantekening van Afrikaans se een-dimensionele geskiedenis en bestaan as “die taal van die witmense” en “die taal van die onderdrukker”, geheel en al gegrond against the government, and used is op ’n wanvoorligting wat indruis teen die their Afrikaans to mobilise communities to fight against the injustices of the day. Members of the UDF, Ashley Kriel, Allan Boesak and Cheryl Carolus come to mind as some of the youth who were at the forefront of resistance politics ware geskiedenis van die taal se oorsprong en ontwikkeling soos voorheen aangestip. Soos Valley en Valley verduidelik: “[W]hile black students in Soweto were protesting against the use of Afrikaans as the language of 50 Id at 42. 50 Id op 42. 18 in Cape Town in the 1970s and instruction, Afrikaans-speaking ’80s.”51 [20] Afrikaans was undeniably employed as a tool of oppression – it is part of our very painful past. As Gasnolar emphasises: “Afrikaans has a painful history in our ‘coloured’ youth joined in the fight against the government, and used their Afrikaans to mobilise communities to fight against the injustices of the day. Members of the UDF, Ashley Kriel, Allan Boesak and Cheryl Carolus, come to country, and was used by the apartheid mind as some of the youth who were regime to degrade millions, and that past cannot simply be ignored.”52 But its history is far more multifaceted and nuanced than that. Valkhoff explains that “[i]t is not always either one thing or another in the evolution of such a delicate social phenomenon as speech or language”.53 And as Roberge rightly concludes: “In the history of Afrikaans it was not always Dutch or substratum at the forefront of resistance politics in Cape Town in the 1970s and ’80s.”51 [20] Afrikaans is ongetwyfeld aangewend as ’n instrument van onderdrukking – dit is deel van ons pynlike verlede. Soos Gasnolar benadruk: “Afrikaans het ’n pynlike verlede in ons land, en was aangewend deur die apartheid regime om miljoene mense te verneder, en daardie verlede kan nie net bloot grammar, but three linguistic ignoreer word nie”.52 Maar die taal se traditions – European, African (Khoikhoi), and Asian – that have met and converged with one another to produce a new whole that is truly more than the sum of its parts.”54 geskiedenis is baie meer veelledig en genuanseerd as dit. Valkhoff verduidelik dat “[d]it is nie altyd bloot die een of die ander aspek in die ewolusie van ’n delikate 51 As cited by Van Heerden above n 12 at 85. 51 Soos aangehaal deur Van Heerden n 12 hierbo op 85. 52 Gasnolar “Afrikaans has a Painful History and was Used to Degrade Millions” (19 November 2015) available at http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opinionista/2015-11-19- afrikaans-has-a-painful-history-and-was-used-to-degrade- millions/#.VzXkl5FcRBe. 52 Gasnolar “Afrikaans has a painful history and was used to degrade millions” (19 November 2015) beskikbaar by http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opinionista/2015-11-19- afrikaans-has-a-painful-history-and-was-used-to-degrade- millions/#.VzXkl5FcRBe. 53 Valkhoff Studies in Portuguese and Creole, with Special Reference to South Africa (Witwatersrand University Press, Johannesburg 1966) at 231. 53 Valkhoff Studies in Portuguese and creole, with special reference to South Africa (Witwatersrand University Press, Johannesburg 1966) op 231. 54 Roberge above n 14 at 87. 54 Roberge, n 14 hierbo op 87. 19 [21] While Afrikaans originated out of nie”.53 En soos Roberge tereg opmerk: maatskaplike verskynsel soos spraak of taal oppression and continued to be a tool of oppression, its subsequent development into a heterogeneous, “rainbow”55 language, spoken today by more black people than white people, is a marvellous paradox of “In the history of Afrikaans it was not always Dutch or substratum grammar, but three linguistic traditions - European, African (Khoikhoi), and Asian - that have human ingenuity and creativity. met and converged with one another Recognising the major role played by lowly indigenous peoples and enslaved people in its history and development is crucial. The misconception that it is “the language of whites” and “the language of the oppressor” is an iniquitous portrayal of the language and its true roots. It bears repetition that today, Afrikaans is spoken predominantly by black people. And it is spoken by black people in not only so-called “coloured” townships, but also in many African townships in several regions in this country. It is the language of prince and pauper alike, existing comfortably in academia and the professions on the one hand, and in every-day parlance on the other. [22] It is apt to follow the example of Froneman J in University of the Free State, by borrowing from the world-renowned South African-born fantasy novelist to produce a new whole that is truly more than the sum of its parts.”54 [21] Alhoewel Afrikaans ontstaan het uit onderdrukking en ’n voortgesette instrument van onderdrukking was, is sy latere ontwikkeling tot ’n heterogene, “reënboog”55 taal wat vandag gebesig word deur meer swartmense as witmense, ’n wonderlike paradoks van menslike ondernemendheid en kreatiwiteit. Die erkenning van die belangrike rol wat eenvoudige inheemse mense en slawe in die taal se geskiedenis en ontwikkeling gespeel het, is ontsettend belangrik. Die wanopvatting van Afrikaans as “die witmense se taal” en “die taal van die onderdrukker”, is ’n skreiende wanvoorstelling van die taal en die ware oorsprong daarvan. Dit verg herhaling dat Afrikaans tans oorheersend die taal van swartmense is. En dit word gebesig deur 55 To borrow from Sachs J in Gauteng Provincial Legislature above n 11. 55 Ontleen van Sachs R in Gauteng Provincial Legislature n 11 hierbo. 20 JRR Tolkien, who pointed out that “it is swartmense, nie net in sogenaamde necessary ‘to distinguish, as far as that is “kleurling” woonbuurte nie, maar ook in baie possible, between languages as such and swart woonbuurte in verskeie streke van ons their speakers’ and to remember that land. Dit is die taal van beide prinse en hul languages ‘are not hostile one to another’”.56 onderdane, wat gemaklik bestaan in die And that it is only when “men are hostile akademie en beroepe aan die een kant, en in [that] the language of their enemies may gewone omgangstaal aan die ander kant. share their hatred”.57 In our country, English has become the mainstream language of [22] Dit is aangewese om Froneman R se choice through necessity in virtually all voorbeeld in University of the Free State na spheres of everyday life, including te volg en te leen vanaf die wêreldbekende commerce, law, culture and education. That Suid-Afrikaans gebore fantasie skrywer, is so, despite its colonial heritage. JRR Tolkien, wat uitgewys het dat “dit Universities as intellectual hubs of noodsaaklik is om ‘te onderskei, so ver transformative constitutionalism must lead moontlik, tussen tale op sigself, en hul the charge for the decolonisation of sprekers’ en om te onthou dat tale ‘nie language. The only way to achieve that is to vyandiggesind teenoor mekaar is nie’”.56 ensure that all indigenous languages are Verder moet ons onthou dat “slegs wanneer progressively introduced as languages of mense vyandiggesind is, hul teenstanders se teaching and learning, within the means taal hul vyandiggesindheid sal deel”.57 In reasonably available. In Gelyke Kanse, this ons land het Engels die hoof voertaal van Court recognised that “[e]ndorsing the keuse geword, bloot vanweë noodsaak, in University’s 2016 Language Policy as alle sfere van alledaagse lewe, insluitend in conforming with section 29(2) comes at a die handel, regte, kultuur en opvoedkunde. cost. Our judgment must acknowledge it.”58 Dit is die geval, ten spyte van die taal se 56 Tolkien “English and Welsh” in Tolkien The Monsters and the Critics and Other Essays (HarperCollins, London 2013) at 178. As cited in University of the Free State above n 5 at para 88. 56 “English and Welsh” in Tolkien The Monsters and the Critics and Other Essays (HarperCollins, Londen 2013) op 178. Soos verwys na in University of the Free State n 5 hierbo in para 88. 57 Id at para 88. 57 Id op para 88. 58 Gelyke Kanse above n 3 at para 47. 58 Gelyke Kanse n 3 hierbo in para 47. 59 Id at para 48. 59 Id op para 48. 21 This Court also cautioned that the kolonialistiese afkoms. Universiteite as “flood-tide of English” is a real threat to intellektuele instellings van hervormende minority languages, including Afrikaans.59 grondwetlikheid, moet die voortou neem in The cost and threat in this context were die soeke na die dekolonisering van taal. Die comprehensively articulated by Froneman J enigste manier om dit te bewerkstellig is om in his separate concurrence in that matter te verseker dat alle inheemse tale and need not be repeated. There, and also in stelselmatig ingestel word as tale van University of the Free State, he rightly onderrig en leer, binne geredelik beskikbare bemoaned the dominance of English over middele. In Gelyke Kanse het hierdie Hof as other indigenous languages, including volg toegegee: “die bevestiging dat die Afrikaans.60 Universiteit se 2016 Taalbeleid voldoen aan artikel 29(2) kom teen ‘n koste. Ons [23] To conclude under this rubric: the uitspraak moet erkenning verleen daaraan”.58 disturbing tendency of the one-dimensional Hierdie Hof het ook gemaan dat “die portrayal of Afrikaans as a “white vloedgolf van Engels” ’n wesenlike language”, and as “the language of the bedreiging is vir minderheidstale, insluitend oppressor”, is manifestly misconceived, as I Afrikaans.59 Die koste en bedreiging in have attempted to show. Afrikaans speakers hierdie verband is breedvoerig uiteengesit must accept, however, that their language deur Froneman R in sy aparte now enjoys equal status with the other ten samestemmende uitspraak in daardie saak en official languages. Afrikaans cannot behoef geen herhaling nie. Daar, en ook in continue to enjoy its privileged position to University of the Free State, het hy tereg the exclusion of the other indigenous Engels se oorheersing oor ander inheemse languages, which were so terribly neglected tale, insluitend Afrikaans, bekla.60 under apartheid. That said, it is imperative to dispute its one-dimensional, skewed [23] Ter afsluiting van hierdie rubriek: die hegemonic white history by asserting that kommerwekkende tendens van die eensydige Afrikaans constitutes heterogeneity. We voorhou van Afrikaans as ’n “wit taal” en 60 Id at paras 75 and 79 and University of the Free State above n 5 at para 93. 60 Id in paragrawe 75 en 79 en University of the Free State n 5 hierbo in para 93. 22 must remain mindful of Chinua Achebe’s “die onderdrukker se taal”, is gegrond op ’n perspective of history that “until the lions skreiende wanvoorligting, soos ek probeer have their own historians, the history of the aantoon het. Afrikaanssprekendes moet hunt will always glorify the hunter”.61 In the egter aanvaar dat hul taal nou gelyke status present context in particular: geniet met die ander tien amptelike tale. “[W]e still have to recognise the multi-faceted nature of the Afrikaans speaking community, the numerical dominance of its black speakers, and the need to advance Afrikaans kan nie aanhou om sy bevoorregte posisie te geniet ten koste van die ander inheemse tale, wat so verskriklik afgeskeep is onder apartheid, nie. Daarby gesê, is dit noodsaaklik om die eensydige, verwronge Afrikaans in a multilingual, oorheersende wit geskiedenis te bestry deur all-inclusive antiracist environment, as an example and as part of the development and intellectualisation of African languages. We also have to recognise that Afrikaans is at the core of many fellow South Afrikaans se diversiteit te beklemtoon. Ons moet gedagtig bly aan Chinua Achebe se perspektief van geskiedenis dat “totdat die leeus hulle eie geskiedenis skrywers het, sal die geskiedenis van die jag altyd die jagter Africans’ sense of identity, and they vereer”.61 In die onderhawige verband veral: are not necessarily white.”62 [24] Let us turn, then, to the question at the multi-faceted nature of the Afrikaans “[W]e still have to recognise the heart of this matter, which is whether UNISA’s revised language policy, which reduces the extent of teaching and learning in Afrikaans, passes constitutional muster. Background [25] UNISA is the sole distance-learning institution of higher education in speaking community, the numerical dominance of its black speakers, and the need to advance Afrikaans in a multilingual, all-inclusive antiracist environment, as an example and as part of the development and intellectualisation of African languages. We also have to recognise that Afrikaans is at the core of many fellow South Africans’ 61 Brooks above n 8. 62 Willemse II above n 4 at 10. 61 Brooks n 8 hierbo. 62 Willemse II n 4 hierbo op 10. 23 South Africa and the largest on the sense of identity, and they are not continent. The vast majority of UNISA’s students are unable to, or prefer not to, attend residential universities. UNISA was established in 1959 and it offered tuition in both Afrikaans and English. It emerged from the University of the Cape of Good Hope, which was established in 1873.63 necessarily white.”62 [24] Vervolgens behandel ek dan die kernvraag in hierdie saak, die grondwetlikheid van UNISA se hersiene taalbeleid wat die omvang van die onderrig en leer in Afrikaans verminder. Upon its establishment, UNISA was incorporated into a distance-learning Agtergrond university.64 In 2004 it merged with two [25] UNISA is die enigste tersiêre other major distance-learning institutions, instansie in Suid-Afrika wat afstandonderrig Technikon SA and Vista University.65 aanbied, dit is ook die grootste van sy soort op die kontinent. Die meerderheid van [26] At the outset, it is useful to expound UNISA se studente is nie in staat, of verkies UNISA’s 2006 language policy. The stated om nie by residensiële universiteite te objective of the 2006 language policy was to studeer nie. UNISA is in 1959 gestig en het inform “the use of language in all aspects of onderrig in beide Afrikaans en Engels communication of the University, i.e. aangebied. UNISA het ontstaan vanuit die tuition, public, internal and external Universiteit van die Kaap die Goeie Hoop, communication”. It promised, amongst wat in 187363 gestig is, en is later omskep in other things, that UNISA would make ’n universiteit vir afstandsonderrig.64 In tuition available in the official languages of 2004 het UNISA en twee ander groot South Africa on the basis of functional instansies vir afstandonderrig, Technikon multilingualism. While English and Suider-Afrika en Vista Universiteit, Afrikaans could operate as higher saamgesmelt.65 63 UNISA “The Leading ODL University” (2020), available at https://www.unisa.ac.za/sites/corporate/default/About/The- leading-ODL-university. 63 UNISA “The Leading ODL University” (2020) beskikbaar by https://www.unisa.ac.za/sites/corporate/default/About/The- leading-ODL-university. 64 Id. 64 Id. 65 UNISA Access to Information Manual (2006) at 1. 65 UNISA Access to Information Manual (2006) op 1. 24 education-level languages, UNISA would pro-actively support African languages with [26] Uit die staanspoor is dit van nut om a view to them becoming the medium of met UNISA se 2006 taalbeleid te begin. Die instruction at higher education level. That gestelde doelwit van UNISA se 2006 2006 language policy was revised in 2010. taalbeleid was om “die gebruik van taal in According to UNISA, this need for revision alle aspekte van kommunikasie van die stemmed from a natural attrition of the Universiteit toe te lig, d.w.s. onderrig, demand for Afrikaans, a desire for equality openbare, interne en eksterne between Afrikaans and other African kommunikasie”. Dit het, onder andere, languages as support, rather than as beloof dat UNISA onderrig beskikbaar sou languages of teaching and learning, and stel in die amptelike tale van Suid-Afrika students’ preference to study in English. volgens die beginsel van funksionele Consequently, after 2010, teaching and veeltaligheid. Terwyl Afrikaans en Engels learning at UNISA was delivered in terms of op hoër onderwysvlak as onderrigtaal a revised language policy that envisaged the gebruik kon word, sou UNISA pro-aktief die promotion and advancement of gebruik van ander Afrikatale ondersteun, met multilingualism, whilst retaining Afrikaans die oog daarop om hierdie tale op hoër and English as languages of teaching and onderwysvlak as onderrigmedium aan te learning. wend. Daardie 2006 taalbeleid is in 2010 hersien. Volgens UNISA het die behoefte [27] In 2012, UNISA introduced the om die taalbeleid te hersien ontspruit as “Guidelines for the Discontinuation of gevolg van die natuurlike afname in die Afrikaans in Certain Modules” (the vraag na Afrikaans, ’n strewe na gelykheid Guidelines). The Guidelines operated tussen Afrikaans en ander Afrikatale as together with the revised 2010 policy. In ondersteuningstale eerder as taal van leer en terms of the Guidelines, all undergraduate onderrig, asook die voorkeur van studente modules were grouped into one of three om in Engels te studeer. Gevolglik is leer en categories. These were: onderrig by UNISA aangebied na 2010 (a) Fully bilingual, English and volgens die hersiene taalbeleid, wat die Afrikaans, for tuition in any bevordering van meertaligheid beoog het, module that has consistently 25 not had fewer than 100 terwyl Afrikaans en Engels as onderrigtale Afrikaans students in the last behoue gebly het. three years; (b) Mixed mode delivery in terms [27] In 2012 het UNISA die “Riglyne vir of which all modules that have die Staking van Afrikaans in Sekere consistently had, over the last Modules” (die Riglyne) bekendgestel. Die three years, between 15 and Riglyne is in samehang met die hersiene 100 Afrikaans students in 2010 beleid toegepas. Ingevolge die Riglyne every registration period, was alle voorgraadse modules in een van die would automatically volgende drie kategorieë ingedeel. Dit was: discontinue formal tuition and (a) Volkome tweetalig, Engels en printed study material in Afrikaans, vir onderrig in Afrikaans; and enige module wat oor die (c) English-only modules that voorafgaande drie jaar consistently over the previous voortdurend nie minder as 100 three years have had less than Afrikaanse studente gehad het 15 Afrikaans students in every nie; registration period, may (b) Gemengde modus aanbieding, discontinue tuition in waarvolgens formele onderrig Afrikaans, provided the en gedrukte studiemateriaal Senate Language Committee outomaties gestaak sou word (SLC), which was established in alle modules wat oor die by the Senate to review voorafgaande drie jaar UNISA’s language policy and, voortdurend tussen 15 en 100 thereafter, make Afrikaanse studente in elke recommendations to the registrasietydperk gehad het; Senate, is informed en accordingly. Departments (c) Modules alleenlik in Engels would have the option to aangebied wat oor die continue tuition in Afrikaans voorafgaande drie jaar in these modules, but may voortdurend minder as 15 26 only make study materials Afrikaanse studente in elke available on a digital platform. registrasietydperk gehad het Examination papers for these kon gestaak word, mits die modules would be in English, Senaat se Taal Kommittee but with an option to have (STK), wat deur die Senaat Afrikaans papers so that gestig is om UNISA se students would be able to read taalbeleid te hersien en the examination papers in aanbevelings aan die Senaat te Afrikaans and to answer them maak, dienooreenkomstig in that language. ingelig is. Departemente sou die opsie hê om onderrig in [28] After a comprehensive review hierdie modules in Afrikaans process, commencing in 2013, a draft voort te sit, maar language policy and its implementation plan, studiemateriaal moes slegs op providing for only English as a language of ’n digitale platform beskikbaar teaching and learning, was formulated in gestel word. 2014. Several meetings followed during the Eksamenvraestelle vir hierdie ensuing two years, in which UNISA’s SLC, modules sou in Engels Senate and Council deliberated extensively opgestel word, met die opsie on the draft language policy. Acting in om Afrikaanse vraestelle terms of section 27(2) of the Higher beskikbaar te stel sodat Education Act (the Act),66 UNISA’s Senate studente die vraestelle in (whose Chairperson is the second applicant) Afrikaans kon lees en and Council (whose Chairperson is the first beantwoord. applicant) decided to adopt this revised language policy on 30 March 2016 and [28] Na afloop van ’n omvattende 28 April 2016 respectively (the impugned hersieningsproses wat in 2013 begin is, is decision). daar in 2014 ’n konsep taalbeleid en implementeringsplan geformuleer wat slegs 66 101 of 1997. 66 101 van 1997. 27 [29] Section 27(2) of the Act empowers a vir Engels as leer- en onderrigtaal university, subject to the policy framework voorsiening gemaak het. In die determined by the Minister of Higher daaropvolgende twee jaar is verskeie Education and Training, through its Council, vergaderings belê waar UNISA se STK, die and with the concurrence of its Senate, to Senaat en die Raad breedvoerig beraadslaag determine its language policy, publish it and het oor die konsep taalbeleid . Kragtens make it available upon request. The relevant artikel 27(2) van die Wet op Hoër policy framework for present purposes is the Onderwys,66 het die Senaat (die Senaat se Language Policy for Higher Education (the Voorsitter is die tweede applikant) en die National Language Policy), established by Raad (die Raad se Voorsitter is die eerste the Ministry of Education in November applikant) onderskeidelik op 30 Maart 2016 2002.67 The stated objective of UNISA’s en 28 April 2016 besluit om die hersiene revised language policy was to institute taalbeleid aan te neem (die gewraakte measures to enhance the status of indigenous besluit). African languages, while also phasing out Afrikaans and thereby removing the [29] Artikel 27(2) van die Wet bemagtig ‘n guarantee that courses be offered in both universiteit om deur die Raad en met Afrikaans and English. In effect, English goedkeuring van die Senaat, ‘n taalbeleid te became the sole medium of tuition and ontwikkel, te publiseer en beskikbaar te stel 67 The National Language Policy’s main objectives are as follows: “[T]o promote multilingualism and to enhance equity and access in higher education through the development, in the medium to long-term, of South African languages as mediums of instruction in higher education, alongside English and Afrikaans; [t]he development for promoting student of strategies proficiency in designated language(s) of tuition; [t]he retention and strengthening of Afrikaans as a language of scholarship and science; [t]he promotion of the study of South African languages and literature through planning and funding incentives; [t]he promotion of the study of foreign languages; and [t]he encouragement of multilingualism in institutional policies and practices.” 28 67 Die Nasionale Taalbeleid se hoof doelwitte is: tot “[O]m veeltaligheid te bevorder en om billikheid en toegang tot hoër onderwys te versterk deur die ontwikkeling, in die langtermyn, van Suid- medium- Afrikaanse tale as onderrigmediums in hoër onderwys, tesame met Engels en Afrikaans; [d]ie ontwikkeling van strategiëe om studente vaardigheid in ’n aangewese taal of tale van onderrig te bevorder; [d]ie behoud en versterking van Afrikaans as ’n taal van kundigheid en wetenskap, [d]ie bevordering van die studie van ander Suid-Afrikaanse tale en en literatuur [d]ie befondsings bevordering van buitelandse tale; en [d]ie aanmoediging van veeltaligheid in institusionele beleide en praktyke”. inisiatiewe; die beplanning- studie deur van learning. All formal course materials, op versoek. Hierdie beleidsbepaling is assignments and examinations were onderhewig aan die beleidsraamwerk wat available in English only.68 deur die Minister van Hoër Onderwys en Litigation History doeleindes is die relevante beleidsraamwerk Opleiding daargestel word. Vir huidige die Taalbeleid vir Hoër Onderwys (die Nasionale Taalbeleid) wat in November 2002 deur die Ministerie van Onderwys bekendgestel is.67 Die verklaarde doelwit van UNISA se hersiene taalbeleid was om maatstawwe te implementeer wat die status van inheemse Afrikatale bevorder en terselfdertyd Afrikaans uit te faseer en daardeur die waarborg, dat kursusse in beide Afrikaans en Engels aangebied sal word, te verwyder. Die effek was dus dat Engels die enigste medium van onderrig en leer geword het. Alle formele kursus materiaal, opdragte en eksamens was slegs in Engels beskikbaar gestel.68 High Court [30] The respondent, AfriForum NPC (AfriForum), launched an application in the High Court of South Africa, Gauteng Division, Pretoria, to review and set aside the language policy because of procedural irregularities and the policy’s inconsistency with section 29(2) of the Constitution, and to interdict the implementation of the policy pending that review application.69 AfriForum challenged the legality and rationality of the language policy. It also argued that it is not consistent with section 29(2) of the Constitution, as it does not accommodate Afrikaans students’ desire to be taught in the language of their choice, even though it is reasonably practicable to do so. 68 Clause 4.2.1 of the revised policy unequivocally states: “The language of learning and teaching in all undergraduate courses will be English, with scaffolding in other official languages as outlined in 4.4.” The “scaffolding” refers to learner support materials and activities. 68 Klousule 4.2.1 van die hersiende taalbeleid verklaar onomwonde: “Die taal van leer en onderrig in alle voorgraadse kursusse sal Engels wees, met ondersteuning in ander amptelike tale soos uiteengesit in 4.4”. Die “ondersteuning” verwys na studente ondersteunings materiaal en aktiwiteite. 69 AfriForum v Chairman of the Council of the University of South Africa [2017] 1 All SA 832 (GP) (High Court judgment). 69 AfriForum v Chairman of the Council of the University of South Africa [2017] 1 All SA 832 (GP) (Hooggeregshof uitspraak). 29 [31] The review application was partly Litigasie geskiedenis based on the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act (PAJA),70 on the assumption that the impugned decision constituted administrative action.71 However, after the institution of the review application, it was held by this Court in University of the Free State that the language policy decision taken in that instance by the University of the Free State did not constitute administrative action within the meaning of PAJA.72 AfriForum then abandoned its reliance on PAJA, but it persisted with its challenge on the principle of legality. That challenge failed in the High Court.73 [32] The High Court noted that the constitutional right to receive an education in the language of one’s choice is qualified as “tuition in the language of choice must be ‘where that education is reasonably practicable’”.74 Given the declining demand for Afrikaans, together with the need for resources to develop the academic status of other official languages, the High Court Hooggeregshof [30] Die respondent, AfriForum NWO (AfriForum), het ’n aansoek in die Hooggeregshof van Suid Afrika, Gauteng Afdeling, Pretoria (Hooggeregshof) ingestel om die taalbeleid te hersien en tersyde te stel op grond van prosedurele onreëlmatighede en teenstrydigheid met artikel 29(2) van die Grondwet. Daarmee saam is aansoek gedoen vir ‘n interdik om die implementering van die beleid te verhoed hangende daardie hersieningsaansoek.69 AfriForum het die wetlikheid en rasionaliteit van die taalbeleid betwis. AfriForum het ook aangevoer dat die taalbeleid teenstrydig is met artikel 29(2) van die Grondwet, omrede dit nie Afrikaanse studente, wat ’n begeerte het om in die taal van hul keuse te studeer, akkommodeer nie, ten spyte daarvan dat dit redelik prakties uitvoerbaar is om dit te doen. [31] Die hersieningsaansoek was gedeeltelik gebring in terme van die Wet op Bevordering van Administratiewe 70 3 of 2000. 70 3 van 2000. 71 High Court judgment above n 69 at para 20. 71 Hooggeregshof uitspraak n 69 hierbo in para 20. 72Id; University of the Free State above n 5 at para 35. 72 Id; University of the Free State n 5 hierbo in para 35. 73 High Court judgment above n 69 at para 21 and 81. 73 Hooggeregshof uitspraak n 69 hierbo in paragrawe 21 en 81. 74 Id at para 28. 74 Id in para 28. 30 found that UNISA was justified, because of Geregtigheid (WBAG)70 op die considerations of equity, practicability, and veronderstelling dat die gewraakte besluit the need to redress the results of past racially administratiewe optrede behels.71 Nadat die discriminatory practices, to discontinue the hersieningsaansoek ingestel is, het hierdie use of Afrikaans as a language of teaching Hof egter in University of the Free State and learning.75 There was thus no violation beslis dat die besluit aangaande die taalbeleid of the section 29(2) right. wat deur die Universiteit van die Vrystaat in daardie aangeleentheid geneem is, nie [33] On rationality, the High Court held administratiewe aksie soos bedoel in die that the language policy was rationally WBAG behels nie.72 AfriForum het die connected to UNISA’s powers in terms of steun op die WBAG laat vaar, maar steeds section 27(2) of the Act and the National voortgegaan met bestryding op grond van die Language Policy.76 The High Court noted wetlikheidsbeginsel. Die aansoek in die that, while the National Language Policy in Hooggeregshof was onsuksesvol.73 general supports the retention of Afrikaans as a language of academia and science, this [32] Die Hooggeregshof het genotuleer dat does not prohibit the adoption of policies die grondwetlike reg om onderwys in ’n taal that remove Afrikaans.77 In respect of van eie keuse te ontvang gekwalifiseer word legality, the High Court dismissed as “onderwys in die taal van keuse moet wees AfriForum’s submissions that certain ‘waar daardie onderwys redelikerwys procedures provided for in the rules of the doenlik is’”.74 Gegewe die afname in die Senate had not been complied with and that vraag na Afrikaans, tesame met die these procedural irregularities rendered the hulpbronne wat benodig word om die decision invalid.78 While certain specific akademiese status van die ander amptelike rules were not complied with – specifically, tale te bevorder, het die Hooggeregshof no formal vote had occurred and information bevind dat UNISA se besluit om die gebruik was distributed to members later, outside the van Afrikaans as leer- en onderrigtaal te 75 Id at para 41. 76 Id at para 45. 77 Id. 78 Id at paras 65-72. 75 Id in para 41. 76 Id in para 45. 77 Id. 78 Id in paragrawe 65-72. 31 official timeframe – the Senate had followed staak, geregverdig was vanweë oorweginge the rules it created for itself by convention, van billikheid, uitvoerbaarheid en die which allowed for flexibility.79 In addition, noodsaaklikheid om die gevolge van rasse the High Court held that AfriForum could diskriminerende praktyke van die verlede reg not rely on Albutt80 as the basis for its te stel.75 Daar was dus geen skending van die procedural challenge, because that case did artikel 29(2) reg nie. not give rise to a general principle that public consultations must occur whenever [33] Wat rasionaliteit aanbetref, het die institutions determine policy.81 The High Hooggeregshof bevind dat die taalbeleid Court consequently dismissed the review rasioneel verband hou met UNISA se application.82 bevoegdhede ingevolge artikel 27(2) van die Wet op Hoër Onderwys en die Nasionale Supreme Court of Appeal Taalbeleid.76 Die Hooggeregshof het [34] With the leave of the High Court, AfriForum successfully appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.83 That Court, relying on Ermelo,84 emphasised that in an instance where a student already enjoys the benefit of being taught in an official language of their choice, the state has a negative duty not to diminish this right genotuleer dat, hoewel die Nasionale Taalbeleid oor die algemeen die behoud van Afrikaans as akademiese- en navorsingstaal ondersteun, dit nie die aanneem van beleide wat Afrikaans verwyder, verbied nie.77 Wat wetlikheid aanbetref, het die Hooggeregshof AfriForum se betoog, dat daar nie aan sekere prosedures wat in die Senaatreëls vervat 79 Id at paras 70-2. 79 Id in paragrawe 70-2. 80 Albutt v Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation [2010] ZACC 4; 2010 (3) SA 293 (CC); 2010 (5) BCLR 391 (CC). 80 Albutt v Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation [2010] ZACC 4; 2010 (3) SA 293 (CC); 2010 (5) BCLR 391 (CC). 81 High Court judgment above n 69 at paras 78-9. 81 Hooggeregshof uitspraak n 69 hierbo in paragrawe 78-9. 82 Id at para 87. 82 Id in para 87. 83 AfriForum NPC v Chairperson of the Council of the University of South Africa, unreported judgment of the Supreme Court of Appeal, Case No 765/2018 (30 June 2020) (Supreme Court of Appeal judgment) at para 3. 84 Head of Department, Mpumalanga Department of Education v Hoërskool Ermelo [2009] ZACC 32; 2010 (2) SA 415 (CC); 2010 (3) BCLR 177 (CC) (Ermelo). 83 AfriForum NPC v Chairperson of the Council of the University of South Africa; ongerapporteerde uitspraak van die Hoogste Hof van Appèl, Saak No 765/2018 (30 Junie 2020) (Hoogste Hof van Appèl uitspraak) in para 3. 84 Head of Department, Mpumalanga Department of Education v Hoërskool Ermelo [2009] ZACC 32; 2010 (2) SA 415 (CC); 2010 (3) BCLR 177 (CC) (Ermelo). 32 without appropriate justification. In order to word voldoen is nie en dat hierdie justify the removal of the dual prosedurele onreëlmatighede die besluit English/Afrikaans model of teaching and ongeldig gemaak het, verwerp.78 Alhoewel learning, UNISA had to show that it was not sekere spesifieke reëls nie nagekom is nie – reasonably practicable to sustain it, but had meer spesifiek dat daar geen formele failed to do so.85 In addition, the Supreme stemproses plaasgevind het nie en dat Court of Appeal held that the justification inligting eers na afloop van die amptelike offered by UNISA, based on the availability spertydperk aan lede versprei is – het die of resources, was unconvincing in light of Senaat in die besluitnemingsproses, deur the normative content of section 29(2) of the konvensie, eie reëls geskep wat Constitution.86 The Court emphasised that buigsaamheid moontlik gemaak het.79 compliance with section 29(2) goes “beyond Boonop het die Hooggeregshof bevind dat the availability of resources”.87 AfriForum nie op Albutt80 kan steun as die basis van die prosedurele argument nie, [35] As for the considerations of equity omdat Albutt nie ’n algemene beginsel that are central to the determination of geskep het wat bepaal dat openbare reasonable practicability, the Supreme Court konsultasies moet plaasvind wanneer of Appeal held that the facts of the matter are instellings beleide bepaal nie.81 Die distinguishable from those in University of Hooggeregshof het gevolglik die the Free State and Gelyke Kanse.88 UNISA hersieningsaansoek van die hand gewys.82 is a distance-learning university, so there was no threat of Afrikaans creating Hoogste Hof van Appèl segregated classes or fostering racial supremacy, the Court reasoned.89 Ultimately, the Supreme Court of Appeal [34] Met verlof van die Hooggeregshof het AfriForum suksesvol appèl aangeteken na die Hoogste Hof van Appèl.83 Daardie Hof, 85 Supreme Court of Appeal judgment above n 83 at paras 35-7, 47. 85 Hoogste Hof van Appèl uitspraak n 83 hierbo in paragrawe 35-7, 47. 86 Id at para 38. 87 Id. 88 Id at para 42. 89 Id. 86 Id in para 38. 87 Id. 88 Id in para 42. 89 Id. 33 concluded that UNISA had failed to wat op Ermelo84 gesteun het, het beklemtoon establish that the adoption of its new policy dat die staat, in ‘n geval waar ‘n student reeds in 2016 was conducted in a constitutionally onderrig ontvang in ‘n amptelike taal van eie compliant manner and did not detract from keuse, ’n negatiewe plig het om nie sonder the section 29(2) right without appropriate behoorlike regverdiging hierdie reg te beperk justification.90 The Supreme Court of nie. Om die verwydering van die Appeal declared the adopted language dubbelmedium (Engels/Afrikaans) model policy unconstitutional and unlawful and set van onderrig en leer te regverdig, moes it aside.91 It ordered UNISA to reinstate UNISA bewys dat dit nie redelik uitvoerbaar Afrikaans modules that have been was om die model te onderhou nie,85 maar discontinued pursuant to the adoption of the het hierin misluk. Verder het die Hoogste language policy.92 Hof van Appèl bevind dat die regverdiging wat UNISA voorgehou het, wat verband [36] In upholding the appeal with costs, gehou het met die beskikbaarheid van the Supreme Court of Appeal issued the hulpbronne, nie oortuigend was nie, gegewe following order: die normatiewe aard van artikel 29(2) van die “The order of the court a quo is set aside and replaced with the following: (a) the resolutions of the Council and Senate of the Grondwet.86 Die Hof het daarop gewys dat die nakoming van artikel 29(2) “meer verg as die beskikbaarheid van hulpbronne”.87 [35] Ten opsigte van die University of South Africa billikheidsoorwegings, wat die kern van die to approve a new language policy on 28 April and 30 March 2016, respectively, are set aside; (b) the new language policy adopted by the University of South Africa is declared bepaling van redelike uitvoerbaarheid vorm, het die Hoogste Hof van Appèl bevind dat die feite van die aangeleentheid onderskei kan word van dié in University of the Free State en Gelyke Kanse.88 Aangesien UNISA 90 Id at para 47. 91 Id at para 48. 92 Id. 90 Id in para 47. 91 Id in para 48. 92 Id. 34 unconstitutional and afstandsonderrig bied, was daar geen unlawful and is set aside to the extent that Afrikaans has been removed as a language of learning and tuition; bedreiging dat Afrikaans aparte klasse sou skep of rasseoorheersing sou bevorder nie.89 Die Hoogste Hof van Appèl het tot die slotsom gekom dat UNISA versuim het om (c) the University of South aan te toon dat die aanvaarding van die nuwe Africa shall prominently publish on its website and in three major Afrikaans newspapers in South Africa and transmit by email to all its students a notice: taalbeleid in 2016 op ‘n grondwetlike wyse geskied het en nie sonder regverdiging die artikel 29(2) reg beperk het nie.90 Die Hoogste Hof van Appèl het die aanvaarde taalbeleid ongrondwetlik en onwettig (i) containing a full verklaar en dit tersyde gestel.91 Die Hof het list of the modules that were on offer in Afrikaans as at 28 April 2016; (ii) offering all prospective students for the next academic year admission in such modules as presented on first year level; (iii) offering all existing students, if they were enrolled in any one of those courses or would have enrolled for the subsequent year course available in Afrikaans, but had perforce to follow 35 UNISA gelas om die Afrikaanse modules, wat op grond van die nuwe taalbeleid gestaak is, weer in te stel.92 [36] Die Hoogste Hof van Appèl het die appèl met koste gehandhaaf en die volgende bevel uitgereik: “Die bevel van die hof a quo word tersyde gestel en vervang met die volgende: (a) die resolusie van die Raad en Senaat van die Universiteit van Suid Afrika op 28 April en 30 Maart 2016 onderskeidelik om ’n nuwe taalbeleid goed te keur, word tersyde gestel; (b) die nuwe taalbeleid wat deur die Universiteit van Suid the module in English, a choice to enrol on the basis that they may follow the module in Afrikaans until completion of their studies; (iv) all the modules mentioned above will be presented in full in the following academic years until the language policy has been lawfully amended, if at all.”93 In this Court [37] UNISA argues that the Supreme Court of Appeal erred in concluding that the information that was before the Senate and Council was not sufficient to comply with the reasonable practicability requirement. This is so because, as set out in Gelyke Kanse, the constitutional criterion of reasonable practicability under section 29(2) is objective. UNISA contends that the continued provision of Afrikaans language modules at UNISA is not reasonably practicable. That is due to the low and 93 Id. 93 Id. 36 Afrika aanvaar is, word ongrondwetlik en onwettig verklaar en word tersyde gestel tot die mate dat dit Afrikaans as leer- en onderrigtaal verwyder; (c) die Universiteit van Suid Afrika moet prominent ’n kennisgewing op sy webwerf en in drie groot Afrikaanse koerante in Suid Afrika publiseer en per e- pos aan al sy studente stuur wat: (i) ’n volledige lys van die modules wat op 28 April 2016 in Afrikaans aangebied is bevat; (ii) alle voornemende studente vir die komende akademiese jaar toelating bied in modules soos op eerstejaarsvlak aangebied; (iii) aan alle bestaande studente, indien hulle ingeskryf was vir een van daardie kursusse of sou inskryf vir die dwindling demand for courses in Afrikaans, and the need for equity in language policy so that past imbalances may be redressed. UNISA also invokes the substantial attendant costs and language demographics. [38] UNISA points to the following shortcomings in the reasoning of the Supreme Court of Appeal: (a) It failed to appreciate the objective nature of the test under section 29(2), manifested by its conclusion that UNISA made a mistake of law in its interpretation of the right in section 29(2). (b) It took issue with UNISA’s attempts to rely on evidence that had not served before the Senate or Council. daaropvolgende jaarkursus wat in Afrikaans beskikbaar is, maar die module in Engels moes neem, ’n keuse bied om in te skryf met die verstandhouding dat hulle die module in Afrikaans kan neem tot voltooiing van hul studies; (iv) al die bogenoemde modules in die daaropvolgende akademiese jare volledig aangebied sal word totdat die taalbeleid wettiglik gewysig is, indien wel.”93 (c) It erred in departing from the In hierdie Hof Plascon-Evans94 rule in respect of the facts upon which the objective test was to be applied. (d) It erred in accepting AfriForum’s argument on cost containment that study [37] UNISA voer aan dat die Hoogste Hof van Appèl gefouteer het deur tot die slotsom te kom dat die inligting wat voor die Senaat en die Raad was, nie voldoende was om aan die redelike uitvoerbaarheidsvereiste te voldoen nie. Dit is omrede, soos wat in Gelyke Kanse beslis is, die grondwetlike 94 Plascon-Evans Paints Ltd v Van Riebeeck Paints (Pty) Ltd [1984] ZASCA 51; 1984 (3) SA 623 (A) (Plascon- Evans). 94 Plascon-Evans Paints Ltd v Van Riebeeck Paints (Pty) Ltd [1984] ZASCA 51; 1984 (3) SA 623 (A) (Plascon- Evans). 37 materials could be provided maatstaf van redelike uitvoerbaarheid online and that English kragtens artikel 29(2), objektief is. UNISA modules could cross-subsidise beweer dat die voortgesette aanbied van Afrikaans modules. modules in Afrikaans by UNISA nie redelik uitvoerbaar is nie. Dit is as gevolg van die [39] It is forcefully contended on behalf of lae en kwynende vraag na kursusse in UNISA that in applying an objective test, Afrikaans, en die behoefte aan billikheid in there is no concern with how the decision- ’n taalbeleid, sodat die wanbalanse van die maker understood her discretion, what her verlede reggestel kan word. UNISA steun subjective reasons were for the decision, or ook op die aansienlike gepaardgaande koste what did or did not serve before her when en taaldemografie. making the decision. All that matters is whether that decision is justified on the facts [38] UNISA wys op die volgende before the Court. In support of this tekortkominge in die beredenering van die proposition, UNISA cites Pharmaceutical Hoogste Hof van Appèl: Manufacturers.95 UNISA contends that, in (a) Dit het nie die objektiewe aard determining the objective facts, a court van die toets ingevolge artikel applies the ordinarily applicable evidentiary 29(2) begryp nie, wat blyk uit rules. In motion proceedings, that entails die hof se gevolgtrekking dat applying the so-called Plascon-Evans test.96 UNISA ’n regsfout begaan het met die interpretasie van [40] UNISA denies that its decisions were artikel 29(2); irrational, contending that it did not (b) Dit het fout gevind met UNISA “remove”, “abolish”, “eradicate”, se poging om te steun op “abandon” or “do away with” Afrikaans bewyse wat nie voor die Senaat tuition. Instead, the new language policy of die Raad gedien het nie; 95 Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association of South Africa: In re Ex Parte President of the Republic of South Africa [2000] ZACC 1; 2000 (2) SA 674 (CC); 2000 (3) BCLR 241 (CC) (Pharmaceutical Manufacturers) at paras 88-90. 95 Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association of South Africa: In re Ex Parte President of the Republic of South Africa [2000] ZACC 1; 2000 (2) SA 674 (CC); 2000 (3) BCLR 241 (CC) (Pharmaceutical Manufacturers) in paragrawe 88-90. 96 Plascon-Evans above n 94 at 634E-635C, cited at para 16 of Gelyke Kanse above n 3. 96 Plascon-Evans n 94 hierbo op 634E-635C, na verwys in para 16 van Gelyke Kanse n 3 hierbo. 38 preferred English as the language of (c) Dit het gefouteer deur af te teaching and learning, whilst placing wyk van die Plascon-Evans94 Afrikaans on the same footing as the other reël ten opsigte van die feite official languages. Tuition in Afrikaans and waarop die objektiewe toets the other official languages was being toegepas moes word; offered where there is capacity, with learner (d) Dit het gefouteer deur support in the student’s language, and with AfriForum se betoog, dat the intent that Afrikaans’ development as studiemateriaal aanlyn verskaf well as that of the other official languages kan word en vir should be promoted. This, UNISA points kruissubsidiëring deur Engelse out, is best reflected in clause 4.2.3 of the modules om koste te bespaar, new language policy, which provides: te aanvaar. “Where there is capacity, a selected number of modules and programmes will progressively be offered in more than one official South African language in order to [39] Dit word heftig namens UNISA aangevoer dat by die toepassing van ’n objektiewe toets dit nie saak maak hoe die besluitnemer haar diskresie verstaan het nie, support relevant national policies.” wat haar subjektiewe redes vir die besluit was nie, en wat wel en wat nie voor haar It contends that this provision moves the gedien het tydens die neem van die besluit university’s new language policy into a nie. Al wat tersaaklik is, is of die besluit “realm of genuine multilingualism”. geregverdig is deur die feite voor die Hof. As Whereas the previous language policy steun vir hierdie betoog, verwys UNISA na entrenched English and Afrikaans whilst Pharmaceutical Manufacturers.95 UNISA paying lip service to developing other beweer dat by die bepaling van die African languages, the new language policy objektiewe faktore, ’n hof die gewone enables UNISA to offer courses in African toepaslike bewysreëls toepas. In languages as well as in Afrikaans. mosieverrigtinge behels dit die toepassing van die sogenaamde Plascon-Evans toets.96 [41] On remedy, UNISA points to the practical difficulties of reinstating modules 39 that have been discontinued for four years, [40] UNISA ontken dat die besluite which will require extensive resources irrasioneel was, en beweer dat dit nie without any guarantee that any, or a Afrikaanse onderrig “verwyder”, ”afgeskaf”, substantial number of, students will register “uitgeroei”, “weggelaat” of “mee for the modules. In addition, the weggedoen het” nie. Die nuwe taalbeleid het reinstatement of the modules would be the eerder Engels as taal van leer en onderrig same as introducing the modules afresh in verkies, terwyl Afrikaans op dieselfde Afrikaans, so that equity would require that grondslag as die ander amptelike tale geplaas the modules be offered in the nine other is. Onderrig in Afrikaans en in die ander official languages as well. UNISA therefore amptelike tale word aangebied waar daar challenges the orders granted by the kapasiteit is, met leerder ondersteuning in die Supreme Court of Appeal. It submits that student se taal, en met die bedoeling dat the appropriate remedy would rather have Afrikaans en die ander amptelike tale been to suspend any order of invalidity of the bevorder behoort te word. UNISA wys decisions adopting the new language policy, daarop dat dit die beste weerspieël word in so as to enable UNISA to consider what klousule 4.2.3 van die nuwe taalbeleid, wat changes to make to the policy. In the event bepaal: of this Court dismissing its appeal, UNISA requests that the order of invalidity be suspended until the beginning of the 2023 academic year, to enable it to implement an order properly, or to amend its language “Where there is capacity, a selected number of modules and programmes will progressively be offered in more than one official South African language in order to support relevant policy in a constitutionally compliant national policies.” manner. UNISA beweer dat hierdie bepaling die [42] AfriForum argues that section 29(2) universiteit se nuwe taalbeleid laat requires UNISA, as an organ of state, to aanbeweeg na “’n milieu van ware consider all reasonable alternatives and to meertaligheid”. Terwyl die vorige taalbeleid take into account equity, practicability and Engels en Afrikaans verskans het en slegs the need to redress the injustices of the past. lippediens bewys het ten aansien van die UNISA did not do this and has contended ontwikkeling van ontwikkelende Afrika tale, 40 that this is an obligation borne by the state, stel die nuwe taalbeleid UNISA in staat om not itself. Nor did UNISA present any kursusse in ander Afrika tale sowel as evidence to show that formal tuition in Afrikaans aan te bied. Afrikaans would detract from the development of tuition in any other [41] Ten aansien van die remedie, verwys languages, or conduct a study on the demand UNISA na die praktiese struikelblokke om for Afrikaans courses. AfriForum argues modules weer in te stel wat al vir vier jaar that the statistics which UNISA does present gestaak is, wat omvattende hulpbronne should be rejected, as they are not accurate. vereis sonder enige waarborg dat studente vir On the question of equity, it argues that die modules sal registreer. Die herinstel van UNISA failed to show that it would not be die modules sal verder dieselfde uitwerking able to offer the benefits of the new language hê as om die modules in Afrikaans opnuut in policy to students whose first language is te stel. Billikheid sou derhalwe vereis dat die neither English nor Afrikaans, while modules ook in die ander nege amptelike tale retaining Afrikaans as a language of aangebied moes word. UNISA betwis teaching and learning. gevolglik die bevele uitgereik deur die Hoogste Hof van Appèl. Die submissie word [43] AfriForum submits that UNISA bears verder voorgehou dat die gepaste remedie the “negative burden” of establishing eerder sou wees om die bevel van die “appropriate justification” for why the right ongeldigheid van die besluite om die nuwe to receive education in the language of one’s taalbeleid aan te neem, op te skort ten einde choice should be abrogated. The UNISA in staat te stel om veranderinge aan justification must address the criterion of die taalbeleid te oorweeg. Ingeval hierdie “reasonable practicability” referred to in Hof die appèl van die hand sou wys, versoek section 29(2), and UNISA has failed to do UNISA dat die bevel van ongeldigheid so. In addition, UNISA did not consult with opgeskort word tot die begin van die 2023 affected students before deciding to akademiese jaar ten einde dit in staat te stel implement the language policy, and the om die bevel behoorlik te implementeer, of Senate’s decision to approve the language om die taalbeleid te wysig op ’n policy did not comply with the procedural grondwetlike wyse. requirements of section 27(2) of the Act. 41 [44] In the alternative, AfriForum argues that UNISA’s decision was irrational and not authorised by law. On rationality, it argues that the Senate and Council failed to have regard to relevant considerations and to consult persons who would be most directly affected by the decisions. In respect of legality, AfriForum argues that the Senate did not comply with its own rules. And on remedy, it submits that the order of the Supreme Court of Appeal is just and equitable. That order does not mean that UNISA is required to reinstate Afrikaans modules that had already been discontinued under the Guidelines at the time when the new policy was adopted. There is accordingly no merit in UNISA’s contention that the order goes further than reinstating the status quo ante as at 28 April 2016. Jurisdiction and leave to appeal [45] This matter concerns a fundamental right in section 29(2) of the Constitution and, as stated, it is the latest in a trilogy of cases on the policy of Afrikaans as a language of teaching and learning. The source of UNISA’s power to determine language policy is section 27(2) of the Act, which emanates from section 29(2) of the 42 [42] AfriForum betoog dat artikel 29(2) van UNISA, as ’n staatsorgaan, vereis om alle redelike alternatiewe te oorweeg en om billikheid, uitvoerbaarheid, en die noodsaak om die ongeregtighede van die verlede reg te stel. UNISA het dit nie gedoen nie, en beweer eerder dat dit ‘n verpligting is wat op die staat rus, en nie op UNISA nie. UNISA het ook nie enige bewyse voorgelê wat aantoon dat formele onderrig in Afrikaans afbreuk sal doen aan die ontwikkeling van onderrig in ander tale, of ’n studie onderneem oor die behoefte vir Afrikaanse kursusse nie. Die statistieke wat UNISA wel voorlê moet verwerp word, aangesien dit nie akkuraat is nie. Aangaande billikheid, beweer AfriForum dat UNISA versuim het om te toon dat dit nie in staat sou wees om die voordele van die nuwe taalbeleid aan studente te bied wie se huistaal nie Engels of Afrikaans is nie, en terselfdertyd Afrikaans as ’n taal van leer en onderrig te behou. [43] AfriForum voer aan dat UNISA die “negatiewe bewyslas” dra om “gepaste regverdiging” aan te toon waarom die reg om onderrig in jou taal van keuse te ontvang afgeskaf moet word. Die regverdiging moet die maatstaf van “redelike uitvoerbaarheid”, soos na verwys in artikel 29(2), aanspreek, en UNISA het misluk om aldus te doen. Verder Constitution. UNISA was thus exercising het UNISA nie die geaffekteerde studente public power when it took the impugned geraadpleeg voor die besluit geneem is om policy decision, and that policy is die taalbeleid te implementeer nie, en die reviewable under the doctrine of legality.97 Senaat se besluit om die taalbeleid goed te It is now settled that the question whether an keur het nie voldoen aan die prosedurele official language that has been developed to vereistes van artikel 27(2) van die Wet. convey complex scientific and technical concepts and which has been a medium of [44] As alternatief voer AfriForum aan dat instruction for many decades could lose its UNISA se besluit irrasioneel was en nie status as a medium of instruction, is a regtens gemagtig word nie. Betreffende constitutional issue.98 Furthermore, the rasionaliteit, betoog AfriForum dat die history and sensitivity of the choice of a Senaat en die Raad versuim het om die specific language as a medium of tersaaklike oorwegings in ag te neem en om instruction, Afrikaans in particular, die persone wat die meeste geraak gaan word ordinarily raises a point of law of general deur die besluit te raadpleeg. Ten aansien public importance.99 van wetlikheid, betoog AfriForum dat die Senaat nie sy eie reëls nagekom nie. Wat die [46] Like University of the Free State and remedie aanbetref, voer AfriForum aan dat Gelyke Kanse, the issues here engage our die uitspraak van die Hoogste Hof van Appèl jurisdiction and it is in the interests of justice regverdig en billik is. Dié bevel beteken nie to hear the matter. Leave should therefore dat daar van UNISA vereis word om modules be granted. wat alreeds onder die Riglyne gestaak is toe die beleid aangeneem was, weer in te stel nie. Section 29(2) of the Constitution Daar is gevolglik geen meriete in UNISA se [47] Having examined the socio-political space occupied by Afrikaans, we must turn aanname dat die bevel verder gaan as om die status quo ante soos op 28 April 2016 te herstel nie. 97 University of the Free State above n 5 at para 37. 97 University of the Free State n 5 hierbo in para 37. 98 Id at para 38. 99 Id. 98 Id in para 38. 99 Id. 43 our attention to its position in the law. Section 29(2) of the Constitution provides: Jurisdiksie en verlof tot appèl “Everyone has the right to receive education in the official language or languages of their choice in public [45] Hierdie saak handel oor ’n fundamentele reg in artikel 29(2) van die Grondwet, en soos vermeld, is dit die nuutste educational institutions where that in ’n trilogie van sake wat verband hou met education is reasonably practicable. beleidsbesluite oor Afrikaans as ’n medium In order to ensure the effective access to, and implementation of, this right, the state must consider all reasonable educational alternatives, including single medium van opvoeding en onderrig. Die bron van UNISA se bevoegdheid om die taalbeleid te bepaal is artikel 27(2) van die Wet, wat voortspruit uit artikel 29(2) van die institutions, taking into account— Grondwet. UNISA het derhalwe ’n openbare (a) (b) (c) equity; practicability; and the need to redress the results of past racially discriminatory laws and bevoegdheid uitgeoefen toe die gewraakte beleidsbesluit geneem is, en dié beleid is hersienbaar onder die wetlikheids beginsel.97 Dit is nou gevestigde reg dat die vraag of ’n practices”. amptelike taal, wat ontwikkel is om komplekse wetenskaplike en tegniese [48] The section, which consists of “two konsepte oor te dra, wat vir dekades ’n distinct but mutually reinforcing parts”,100 medium van onderrig was en nou moontlik entrenches a qualified right to be taught in a daardie status kan verloor, ’n grondwetlike preferred official language at a public vraagstuk is.98 Verdermeer is die institution of learning. The qualification is geskiedenis en sensitiwiteit van taal as ’n one of reasonable practicability,101 that medium van onderrig, veral Afrikaans, consists of both factual and normative gewoonlik ’n regspunt van algemene components.102 Factually, the question of openbare belang.99 practicability, relates to resource constraints 100 Ermelo above n 84 at para 52. 100 Ermelo n 84 hierbo in para 52. 101University of the Free State above n 5 at paras 53-4. 101 University of the Free State n 5 hierbo in paragrawe 53-4. 102 Id at para 113. 102 Id in para 113. 44 and the feasibility of adopting a particular [46] Soos in University of the Free State en language policy. The normative aspect Gelyke Kanse, betrek die regsvrae hier ons concerns the legal standard of jurisdiksie en dit is in die belang van reasonableness, to be tested against geregtigheid om die aangeleentheid aan te constitutional norms which include equity, hoor. Verlof tot appèl moet dus toegestaan the need for redress of past discriminatory word. laws and practices, and non-racialism. [49] With reference to Ermelo,103 this Court described the process of establishing what “reasonable practicability” entails as follows: “After the words ‘where that education is reasonably practicable’ in section 29(2) follow factors to be Artikel 29(2) [47] Noudat die ondersoek na die sosio- politiese spasie wat deur Afrikaans ingeneem word afgehandel is, moet ons ons aandag verskuif na Afrikaans se posisie in die reg. Artikel 29(2) van die Grondwet bepaal: 103 Ermelo above n 84 at paras 52 and 53, where this Court explained: 103 Ermelo n 84 hierbo in paragrawe 52 en 53 waar hierdie hof verduidelik het: “When it is reasonably practicable to receive tuition in a language of one’s choice will depend on all the relevant circumstances of each particular case. . . . In short, the reasonableness standard built into section 29(2)(a) imposes a context sensitive understanding of each claim for education in a language of choice. . . . It must follow that when a learner already enjoys the benefit of being taught in an official language of choice the [s]tate bears the negative duty not to take away or diminish the right without appropriate justification. . . . The second part of section 29(2) of the Constitution points to the manner in which the [s]tate must ensure and implementation of the right to be taught in the language of one’s choice. . . . In resorting to an option, such as a single or parallel or dual medium of instruction, the [s]tate must take into account what is fair, feasible and satisfies the need to remedy the results of past racially discriminatory laws and practices.” effective access to “When it is reasonably practicable to receive tuition in a language of one’s choice will depend on all the relevant circumstances of each particular case. . . . In short, the reasonableness standard built into section 29(2)(a) imposes a context sensitive understanding of each claim for education in a language of choice . . It must follow that when a learner already enjoys the benefit of being taught in an official language of choice the state bears the negative duty not to take away or diminish the right without appropriate justification . . . The second part of section 29(2) of the Constitution points to the manner in which the state must ensure effective access to and implementation of the right to be taught in the language of one’s choice. . . . In resorting to an option, such as a single or parallel or dual medium of instruction, the State must take into account what is fair, feasible and satisfies the need to remedy the results of past racially discriminatory laws and practices.” 45 considered in an endeavour to give “Elkeen het die reg om in openbare effect to ‘the right to receive onderwysinstellings onderrig te education in the official language or ontvang in die amptelike taal of tale languages of their choice’. This van eie keuse waar daardie onderrig subsection insists on ‘all reasonable redelik uitvoerbaar is. Ten einde die educational alternatives’ being doeltreffende toegang tot, en explored. To avoid lip service to verwesenliking van hierdie reg, te this fundamental right, concrete verseker, moet die staat alle redelike albeit broad options are alluded to onderrig alternatiewe, met inbegrip for ‘effective access’ to it or its van enkelmedium instellings, possible practical enjoyment . . . oorweeg, met inagneming van— section 29(2) requires ‘(a) equity; (b) practicability; and (c) the need to redress the results of past racially discriminatory laws and practices’, to feature prominently in exploring the possibility of offering education in an official language of choice. They relate to equality, responsiveness and non-racialism. And all reasonable educational alternatives must be investigated within this context and with this purpose high on the list of instructive factors.”104 (a) (b) (c) billikheid; uitvoerbaarheid; en die noodsaak om die gevolge van wette en praktyke van die verlede wat op grond van ras gediskrimineer het, reg te stel.” [48] Hierdie artikel, wat bestaan uit “twee onderskeibare maar wedersyds versterkende dele”100 vestig ’n gekwalifiseerde reg om onderrig te word in ’n amptelike taal van [50] The right to education in a language keuse by ’n openbare onderwysinstelling. of one’s choice is entrenched in Die kwalifikasie is een van redelike section 29(2), circumscribed only by uitvoerbaarheid,101 wat bestaan uit beide appropriateness and reasonableness.105 In feitelike en normatiewe komponente.102 that respect, it is aligned with international Feitelik het die vraag oor uitvoerbaarheid betrekking op hulpbronbeperkings en die 104 University of the Free State above n 5 at paras 47-8. 104 University of the Free State n 5 hierbo in paragraaf 47-8. 105 Gelyke Kanse above n 3 at para 21. 105 Gelyke Kanse n 3 hierbo in para 21. 46 instruments.106 In University of the Free haalbaarheid om ’n bepaalde taalbeleid aan State, this Court expounded: te neem. Die normatiewe aspek het “Reasonableness within the context of section 29(2) demands that equity, practicability and the critical need to undo the damage caused by racial discrimination, also be the betrekking op die regsstandaard van redelikheid, wat getoets moet word teen grondwetlike norme wat billikheid, die behoefte van regstelling van diskriminerende wette en praktyke van die verlede en nie- intrinsic features of the decision- rassisme insluit. making process relating to effective access to education in a language of choice. For they are some of the decisive factors to which regard must be had even where ‘a learner [49] Met verwysing na Ermelo,103 het hierdie Hof die proses om vas te stel wat “redelike uitvoerbaarheid” behels, as volg already enjoys the benefit of being beskryf: taught in an official language of choice’. Inequitable access and the “After the words ‘where that unintended entrenchment or education is reasonably practicable’ fuelling of racial disharmony would in section 29(2) follow factors to be thus be the ‘appropriate considered in an endeavour to give justification’ for taking away or effect to ‘“the right to receive diminishing the already existing education in the official language or enjoyment of the right to be taught languages of their choice”’. This in one’s mother tongue.”107 [51] A key consideration is equity, which is an aspect that is emphasised by UNISA in subsection insists on “’all reasonable educational alternatives”’ being explored. To avoid lip service to this fundamental right, concrete albeit the Convention on 106 Id at para 22. In Gelyke Kanse id this Court cited Article 29 of the Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights, 9 June 1996; Article 8 of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, 5 November 1992; Article 29(1)(c) of the Child, the Framework 20 November 1989; Article 12 of Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, 1 February 1995; Article 5 of the Convention Against Discrimination in Education, 14 December 1960; and Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 16 December 1966. the Rights of 106 Id in para 22. In Gelyke Kanse id het hierdie hof Artikel 29 van die Universele Verklaring van Taalregte, 9 Junie 1996, aangehaal; Artikel 8 van die Europese Handves vir Streeks- of Minderheidstale, 5 November 1992; Artikel 29(1)(c) van die Konvensie oor die Regte van die Kind, 20 November 1989; Artikel 12 van die Raamwerkverdrag vir die Beskerming van Nasionale Minderhede, 1 Februarie 1995; Artikel 5 van die Konvensie teen Diskriminasie in die Onderwys, 14 Desember 1960; en Artikel 27 van die Internasionale Verbond oor Burgerlike en Politieke Regte, 16 Desember 1966. 107 University of the Free State above n 5 at para 50. 107 University of the Free State n 5 hierbo in para 50. 47 this Court. UNISA stresses that there is a broad options are alluded to for need for equity in language policy so that past imbalances may be redressed. In addition, it points out that English is accepted locally and internationally as a “effective access” to it or its possible practical enjoyment . . . section 29(2) requires ‘(a) equity; (b) practicability; and (c) the need to redress the results of past racially preferred medium of communication, discriminatory laws and practices,’ business and teaching. This Court elaborated on the principle of equity in University of the Free State: “Where the enjoyment of the right to be instructed in an official language of choice is achievable without undermining any constitutional aspiration or value, then the equity test might well have been met. The challenge could however arise when scarce to feature prominently in exploring the possibility of offering education in an official language of choice. They relate to equality, responsiveness and non-racialism. And all reasonable educational alternatives must be investigated within this context and with this purpose high on the list of instructive factors.”104 [50] Die reg tot onderrig in ’n taal van eie resources are deployed to cater for a keuse is verskans in artikel 29(2), wat slegs negligible number of students, affording them close, personal and very advantageous attention while other students are crowded into lecture rooms. Where access, integration and racial harmony are imperiled by giving effect to the right to be educated in an official language of choice, then the criterion of reasonable practicability would not have been met. . . . Reasonable practicability therefore requires not only that the practicability test be met, but also that considerations of reasonableness that extend to equity 48 deur toepaslikheid en redelikheid omskryf word.105 In daardie opsig strook dit met internasionale instrumente.106 In University of the Free State het hiedie Hof verduidelik: “Reasonableness within the context of section 29(2) demands that equity, practicability and the critical need to undo the damage caused by racial discrimination, also be the intrinsic features of the decision-making process relating to effective access to education in a language of choice. For they are some of the decisive factors to which regard and the need to cure the ills of our must be had even where ‘a learner shameful apartheid past, be already enjoys the benefit of being appropriately accommodated. And taught in an official language of that is achievable only if the choice’. Inequitable access and the exercise of the right to be taught in unintended entrenchment or fuelling a language of choice does not pose of racial disharmony would thus be a threat to racial harmony or the ‘appropriate justification’ for inadvertently nurture racial taking away or diminishing the supremacy. That goes to already existing enjoyment of the practicability. The question then is, right to be taught in one’s mother has the use of Afrikaans as a tongue.”107 medium of instruction at the University had a comfortable co-existence with our collective aspiration to heal the divisions of the past or has it impeded the prospects of our unity in our diversity?”108 [51] ’n Belangrike oorweging is billikheid, ’n aspek wat beklemtoon word deur UNISA in hierdie Hof. UNISA beklemtoon dat daar ’n behoefte is vir billikheid in die taalbeleid ten einde die wanbalanse van die verlede aan te spreek. Verder, wys dit daarop dat Engels Did UNISA comply with the prescripts of aanvaar word op beide plaaslike en section 29(2)? [52] Section 29(2) consists of two parts: (a) first, it confers a right to receive education in the official language of one’s choice at a public institution, subject only to the qualification that such internasionale vlak as ’n voorkeur medium van kommunikasie, besigheid en onderrig. Hierdie Hof het as volg uitgebrei op die beginsel van billikheid in University of the Free State: “Where the enjoyment of the right to be instructed in an official language of choice is achievable without education “is reasonably undermining any constitutional practicable”; aspiration or value, then the equity test might well have been met. The challenge could however arise when 108 Id at paras 52-3. 108 Id in paragrawe 52-3. 49 (b) secondly, it imposes an scarce resources are deployed to obligation for the state to “consider all reasonable educational alternatives”, taking into account the cater for a negligible number of students, affording them close, personal and very advantageous attention while other students are crowded into lecture rooms. Where considerations listed in access, integration and racial paragraphs (a), (b) and (c), “in order to ensure the effective access to, and implementation of” the right. harmony are imperiled by giving effect to the right to be educated in an official language of choice, then the criterion of reasonable practicability would not have been met . . . Reasonable practicability [53] It is plain from this Court’s therefore requires not only that the jurisprudence that “reasonably practicable” envisages something that is reasonably capable of being done. In respect of the obligation on the state, UNISA adopted the practicability test be met, but also that considerations of reasonableness that extend to equity and the need to cure the ills of our shameful apartheid past, be startling position in Prof Moche’s appropriately accommodated. And supplementary affidavit, that “as opposed to the [s]tate, UNISA is not liable to ensure the effective access to, and implementation of, the right concerned in the Republic”. UNISA maintained this position throughout, that is achievable only if the exercise of the right to be taught in a language of choice does not pose a threat to racial harmony or inadvertently nurture racial supremacy. That goes to practicability. The question then until the litigation reached this Court. This is, has the use of Afrikaans as a medium of instruction at the University had a comfortable co- existence with our collective aspiration to heal the divisions of the past or has it impeded the prospects of our unity in our diversity?”108 is a fundamental misconception. UNISA is an organ of state. In Harrielall this Court held: “[I]t cannot be gainsaid that the University is an organ of [s]tate. It is a public institution through which the [s]tate discharges its constitutional obligation to make 50 access to further education Het UNISA die voorskrifte van artikel 29(2) realisable.”109 nagekom? [54] As an organ of state, UNISA is therefore obliged in terms of section 29(2) to “consider all reasonable educational alternatives, including single medium institutions, taking into account (a) equity; (b) practicability; and (c) the need to redress the results of past racially discriminatory laws and practices”. [55] UNISA was constrained to advance facts on affidavit to justify the decision it took by demonstrating that it applied its mind to the considerations listed in section 29(2) and that it complied with the prescripts of that section. This point was emphatically made by this Court in Gelyke Kanse: “Earlier, I noted it was the University’s own decision-making structures that “judged” that the cost of securing inclusivity in teaching, while not diminishing Afrikaans, was too high. Well, who are they to judge that? It is a good question. Certainly, the Court owes no [52] Artikel 29(2) bestaan uit twee gedeeltes: (a) Eerstens vestig dit ’n reg om onderrig te word in ’n amptelike taal van jou keuse by ’n openbare instelling, onderhewig slegs aan die voorbehoud dat sodanige onderrig “redelik prakties uitvoerbaar is”; (b) Tweedens plaas dit ’n verpligting op die staat om “alle redelike onderrig alternatiewe in ag te neem”, met inagneming van die aspekte in paragrawe (a), (b) en (c), “ten einde die effektiewe toegang tot, en implementering van die reg te verseker”. [53] Dit is duidelik uit hierdie Hof se regspraak dat “redelike uitvoerbaarheid” iets vooropstel wat redelikerwys gedoen kan word. Ten aansien van die verpligting op die obvious deference to the institution staat, het UNISA in Prof Moche se 109 Harrielall v University of KwaZulu-Natal [2017] ZACC 38; 2017 JDR 1716 (CC); 2018 (1) BCLR 12 (CC) at para 15. 109 Harrielall v University of KwaZulu-Natal [2017] ZACC 38; 2017 JDR 1716 (CC); 2018 (1) BCLR 12 (CC) in para 15. 51 making the judgment. The Court aanvullende eedsverklaring, die verbasende must itself scrutinise the facts the institution advances for diminishing language-preferent tuition while bearing in mind that it is a multifactored functional houding ingeneem dat “anders as die staat, UNISA geen verpligting het om toe te sien tot effektiewe toegang tot, en implementering van hierdie bepaalde reg in determination in which the die Republiek nie”. UNISA het deurgaans judgment of those entrusted with the institution’s well-being should be accorded what this Court has called ‘appropriate respect’. This means that when considerations of cost are volgehou met hierdie standpunt, totdat die litigasie hierdie Hof bereik het. Hierdie is ’n fundamentele wanopvatting. UNISA is ’n staatsorgaan. In Harrielall het hierdie Hof advanced, the Court’s scrutiny will bevind dat: necessarily be tempered by some measure not of deferring to a “[I]t cannot be gainsaid that the judgment that might not be sound, University is an organ of [s]tate. It but rather of prudent worldly-wise is a public institution through which caution in supplanting the judgment the [s]tate discharges its of experienced others.”110 constitutional obligation to make (Emphasis added.) access to further education realisable.”109 [56] When UNISA’s decision to abandon Afrikaans as a language of teaching and [54] As ’n staatsorgaan is UNISA learning is tested against objective derhalwe verplig om ingevolge artikel 29(2) considerations of reasonableness “alle redelike onderrig alternatiewe te encapsulated in section 29(2), there must be oorweeg, insluitend enkelmedium some evidence of how it, as an organ of state, instellings, met inagneming van (a) went about applying its mind. The decision billikheid; (b) uitvoerbaarheid; en (c) die must, after all, comply with the prescripts of noodsaak om die gevolge van voorheen that section, which specifically calls for an rasgebaseerde diskriminerende wette en evaluation of whether the state (in this case, praktyke reg te stel”. UNISA) did in fact “consider all reasonable 110 Gelyke Kanse above n 3 at para 42. 110 Gelyke Kanse n 3 hierbo in para 42. 52 educational alternatives”, taking into [55] UNISA was verplig om ’n account the considerations listed in eedsverklaring te maak waarin dit feite moes paragraphs (a), (b) and (c). UNISA cannot aanvoer ter regverdiging van die besluit wat simply say that a decision was taken, dit geneem het, deur aan te toon dat dit wel regardless of how it was taken and without aandag geskenk het aan die oorweginge advancing any version of what was vervat in artikel 29(2) en dat dit die considered, and then leave it to this Court to voorskrifte van daardie artikel nagekom het. test its objective reasonableness. That Daardie punt is onomwonde gemaak in would be tantamount to a complete Gelyke Kanse: abdication of its constitutional obligations. As Gelyke Kanse makes plain, there must be facts advanced to justify UNISA’s decision, for the Court to assess whether that decision passes muster.111 [57] It is unsurprising, given its fallacious stance in its papers in respect of these obligations, that UNISA singularly failed to adduce any evidence that it had regard to the considerations listed in section 29(2) at the “Earlier, I noted it was the University’s own decision-making structures that ‘judged’ that the cost of securing inclusivity in teaching, while not diminishing Afrikaans, was too high. Well, who are they to judge that? It is a good question. Certainly, the Court owes no obvious deference to the institution making the judgment. The Court must itself scrutinise the facts the institution advances for diminishing time when the impugned decision was made. language-preferent tuition while In respect of the justification of its decision and compliance with section 29(2), there is no evidence put up by UNISA that bears scrutiny. It is plain that neither the Senate, bearing in mind that it is a multifactored functional determination in which the judgment of those entrusted with the institution’s well-being should be nor the Council, had regard to information accorded what this Court has called relevant to any assessment of reasonable practicability. This includes information regarding: ‘appropriate respect’. This means that when considerations of cost are advanced, the Court’s scrutiny will necessarily be tempered by some 111 Id. 111 Id. 53 (a) what the demand for teaching measure not of deferring to a and learning in Afrikaans at UNISA was; (b) how many students requested judgment that might not be sound, but rather of prudent worldly-wise caution in supplanting the judgment of experienced others.”110 (Klem tuition in Afrikaans; gevoeg) (c) what financial and human resources were required to [56] Wanneer UNISA se besluit om weg te continue with teaching and doen met Afrikaans as taal van onderrig en learning in Afrikaans in order leer gemeet word aan die objektiewe to meet that demand; and oorweginge van redelikheid vervat in (d) the extent to which UNISA artikel 29(2), moet daar ten minste did in fact have such bewysmateriaal bestaan rakende die wyse resources, or put differently, waarop UNISA, qua staatsorgaan, te werke the extent to which it was gegaan het om oorweging te skenk aan die commercially feasible for voorskrifte. Per slot van sake moet die UNISA to continue with besluit tog daardie artikel se voorskrifte tuition and learning in nakom, wat bepaald vereis dat die staat (in Afrikaans. hierdie geval, UNISA), werklik as ’n feit, “oorweging geskenk het aan alle redelike [58] It was incumbent upon UNISA to onderrig alternatiewe”, met inagneming van provide appropriate justification for the die oorweginge in paragrawe (a), (b) en (c). decision it took to change its language policy UNISA kan nie bloot verklaar dat ’n besluit that had an adverse effect on the rights of geneem is nie, ongeag hoe dit geneem is en Afrikaans students to receive tuition in their sonder om ’n weergawe voor te hou van wat language of choice. The principles outlined in ag geneem is, en dit dan aan hierdie Hof in section 29(2) were not explicitly oor te laat om die objektiewe redelikheid considered in the final meetings of the SLC, daarvan te toets nie. Dit sou neerkom op ’n the Senate and the Council, which totale afstanddoening van sy grondwetlike culminated in the adoption of the new verpligtinge. Soos Gelyke Kanse dit duidelik language policy. “Reasonable stel, moet daar feite voorgehou word wat practicability” as a concept and factors UNISA se besluit regverdig, ten einde 54 associated with it do not feature anywhere in hierdie Hof in staat te stel om te bepaal of the deliberations of those entities, and are daardie besluit wel aan die vereistes not mentioned at all in the impugned voldoen.111 decision or in UNISA’s reasons for the decision. [57] Gegewe UNISA se erge dwaling in sy stukke aangaande hierdie verpligtinge, is dit [59] UNISA’s reliance on Pharmaceutical kwalik verrassend dat UNISA heeltemal Manufacturers is fallacious. The passage versuim om enige bewysmateriaal voor te cited does not bear out UNISA’s contentions hou dat dit enigsins ag geslaan het op die that “there is no concern with how the oorweginge vervat in artikel 29(2), ten tyde decision maker understood her discretion, van die bestrede besluit. Daar is geen what her subjective reasons were for the aanvaarbare bewysmateriaal vanaf UNISA decision and what did or did not serve before ten aansien van die regverdiging van sy her when making the decision. All that besluit en die nakoming van artikel 29(2) nie. matters is whether that decision is justified Dit blyk duidelik dat nog die Senaat, nog die on the facts before the Court.” These Raad, enigsins ag geslaan het op tersaaklike submissions, it will be recalled, relate to the inligting om redelike uitvoerbaarheid te objective approach to the reasonable bepaal. Dit sluit in inligting ten opsigte van: practicability criterion in section 29(2). But (a) wat die aanvraag was by that is not what was decided in UNISA ten aansien van Pharmaceutical Manufacturers. That case onderrig en leer in Afrikaans; concerned the question whether a court has (b) hoeveel studente onderrig in the power to review and set aside a decision Afrikaans aangevra het; by the President to bring into force the South (c) welke finansiële en menslike African Medicines and Medical Devices hulpbronne nodig was vir die Regulatory Authority Act.112 That decision voortgesette onderrig en leer in was challenged on the basis that bringing the Afrikaans ten einde te voorsien Act into operation was premature, since the in daardie aanvraag; en regulations necessary to give effect to other 112 132 of 1998. 112 132 van 1998. 55 provisions of the Act were not made. It was (d) die mate waartoe UNISA wel also alleged that the Government Notice sulke hulpbronne gehad het, of purporting to publish the schedules was anders gestel, tot welke mate invalid. The applicants consequently sought dit kommersieel volhoubaar an order declaring invalid the Proclamation was vir UNISA om voort te purportedly bringing the Act into gaan met onderrig en leer in operation113 and the Government Notice.114 Afrikaans. [60] Having become common cause, or at [58] Dit was van UNISA verwag om least not seriously disputed on the papers, behoorlike regverdiging voor te lê vir die that, viewed objectively, the decision to besluit wat geneem is om die taalbeleid te bring the Act into force before the regulatory verander, wat ’n nadelige uitwerking gehad framework was in place, was made in error, het op die regte van Afrikaanse studente om this Court held: onderrig te ontvang in die taal van hul keuse. “The President’s decision to bring the Act into operation in such circumstances cannot be found to be objectively rational on any basis whatsoever. The fact that the Die beginsels vervat in artikel 29(2) is nie uitdruklik oorweeg in die STK, Senaat en die Raad se finale vergaderings wat uitgeloop het in die aanvaarding van die nuwe taalbeleid nie. “Redelike uivoerbaarheid” as President mistakenly believed that it ’n konsep en die faktore wat daarmee was appropriate to bring the Act into force, and acted in good faith in doing so, does not put the matter beyond the reach of the Court’s powers of review. What the Constitution requires is that public gepaard gaan, verskyn nêrens in die besprekings van daardie entiteite nie, en word glad nie vermeld in die bestrede besluit of in UNISA se redes vir die besluit nie. power vested in the Executive and [59] UNISA se steun op Pharmaceutical other functionaries be exercised in an objectively rational manner. This the President manifestly, Manufacturers is misplaas. Die gedeelte wat aangehaal word bied geen steun vir UNISA 113 Pharmaceutical Manufacturers above n 95 at para 4. 113 Pharmaceutical Manufacturers n 95 hierbo in para 4. 114 Id at para 6. 114 Id in para 6. 56 though through no fault of his own, se betoog dat “dit nie saak maak is hoe die failed to do. Rationality in this sense is a minimum threshold requirement applicable to the exercise of all public power by members of the Executive and other functionaries. Action that fails to pass this besluitnemer haar diskresie verstaan het nie, wat haar subjektiewe redes vir die besluit was nie, en wat wel en wat nie voor haar gedien het tydens die neem van die besluit nie. Al wat tersaaklik is, is of die besluit geregverdig is deur die feite voor die Hof”. threshold is inconsistent with the Daar sal onthou word dat hierdie betoog requirements of our Constitution, and therefore unlawful. The setting of this standard does not mean that the courts can or should substitute their opinions as to what is betrekking het op die objektiewe benadering tot die redelike uitvoerbaarheid maatstaf in artikel 29(2). Maar dit is nie wat beslis is in Pharmaceutical Manufacturers nie. Daardie appropriate, for the opinions of saak het gehandel oor die vraag of ’n hof die those in whom the power has been vested. As long as the purpose sought to be achieved by the exercise of public power is within the authority of the functionary, and as long as the functionary’s bevoegdheid het om die besluit van die President om die Wet op Suid-Afrikaanse Medisyne en Mediese Toestelle Regulerende Owerheid112 in werking te stel, te hersien en tersyde te stel. Daardie besluit was betwis op decision, viewed objectively, is die grondslag dat die inwerkingstelling van rational, a court cannot interfere with the decision simply because it disagrees with it, or considers that the power was exercised inappropriately. A decision that is die Wet voortydig was, aangesien die nodige regulasies om uitvoering te gee aan die ander bepalings van die Wet, nog nie gemaak was nie. Dit was ook aangevoer dat die objectively irrational is likely to be Goewermentskennisgewing wat voorgegee made only rarely but if this does occur, a court has the power to intervene and set aside the irrational decision. This is such a case. Indeed, no rational basis for the decision was suggested. On the het om die skedules te publiseer, ongeldig was. Die applikante het gevolglik ’n bevel aangevra waarvolgens die Proklamasie wat voorgegee het om die Wet in werking te stel,113 asook die contrary, the President himself Goewermentskennisgewing, ongeldig approached the court urgently, with verklaar word.114 57 the support of the Minister of Health and the professional associations most directly affected by the Act, contending that a fundamental error had been made, and that the entire regulatory structure relating to [60] Behoudens die feit dat dit gemeensaak geword het, of ten minste nie ernstig betwis was op die stukke nie dat, objektief beskou, die besluit om die Wet in werking te stel medicines and the control of alvorens die beheer maatreëls se raamwerk medicines had as a result been rendered unworkable. In such circumstances, it would be strange indeed if a court did not have the power to set aside a decision that is so clearly irrational.”115 [61] That dictum pertains to the proper daargestel is, berus op ’n foutiewe besluit, het hierdie Hof beslis: “The President’s decision to bring the Act into operation in such circumstances cannot be found to be objectively rational on any basis whatsoever. The fact that the approach to a review based on rationality President mistakenly believed that it and the power of a court to set aside irrational decisions. It does not support UNISA’s approach for at least two reasons. The first is that the comments made by this Court in Pharmaceutical Manufacturers was appropriate to bring the Act into force, and acted in good faith in doing so, does not put the matter beyond the reach of the Court’s powers of review. What the Constitution requires is that public must be read alongside this Court’s decision power vested in the Executive and in Simelane, which confirmed that a decision will be irrational if the decision-maker ignores relevant considerations and thus other functionaries be exercised in an objectively rational manner. This the President manifestly, though through no fault of his own, failed to arrives at a decision by way of an irrational do. decision-making process. So, insofar as the rationality leg of AfriForum’s review is Rationality in this sense is a minimum threshold requirement concerned, the process by which UNISA applicable to the exercise of all arrived at its decision is relevant. The second difficulty with UNISA’s reliance on public power by members of the Executive and other functionaries. Action that fails to pass this 115 Id at paras 89-90. 115 Id in paragrawe 89-90. 58 Pharmaceutical Manufacturers is that threshold is inconsistent with the section 29(2) in its own terms expressly provides that the “state” (in this case, UNISA)— “must consider all reasonable educational alternatives . . . taking into account— (a) (b) (c) equity practicability; and the need to redress the results of past racially discriminatory laws and practices.” requirements of our Constitution, and therefore unlawful. The setting of this standard does not mean that the courts can or should substitute their opinions as to what is appropriate, for the opinions of those in whom the power has been vested. As long as the purpose sought to be achieved by the exercise of public power is within the authority of the functionary, and as long as the functionary’s decision, viewed objectively, is rational, a court cannot interfere with the decision simply because it disagrees with it, UNISA’s suggestion that this Court should or considers that the power was completely ignore the fact that UNISA did not consider reasonable practicability when taking its decision to revise the language policy would fly in the face of the language of section 29(2) itself. UNISA’s exercised inappropriately. A decision that is objectively irrational is likely to be made only rarely but if this does occur, a court has the power to intervene and set aside the irrational decision. This is such a submissions in this regard are therefore case. Indeed, no rational basis for devoid of merit and the passages cited are misconceived. [62] In any event, an objective the decision was suggested. On the contrary, the President himself approached the court urgently, with the support of the Minister of Health and the professional associations consideration ex post facto bears out the most directly affected by the Act, soundness of the Supreme Court of Appeal’s findings against UNISA. That Court correctly held that the present situation is distinguishable from the Gelyke Kanse and University of the Free State scenarios, contending that a fundamental error had been made, and that the entire regulatory structure relating to medicines and the control of medicines had as a result been rendered unworkable. In such 59 because UNISA is uniquely a circumstances, it would be strange distance-learning institution. University of the Free State concerned parallel-medium education that had led to racial segregation in the lecture rooms. The University of the Free State changed its own language policy because “the use of Afrikaans . . . unintentionally [became] a facilitator of ethnic or cultural separation and racial tension” in the lecture rooms.116 In other words, “the use of Afrikaans as a parallel language of instruction unwittingly perpetuate[d] segregation and racism”.117. By contrast, there is no prospect that the continuation of Afrikaans as a language of teaching and learning at UNISA would constitute a threat to racial harmony, precisely because at UNISA there is no tuition in lecture rooms. There can thus be no apprehension of the kind of racial segregation that arose at the University of the Free State – although this conclusion is subject to the qualification I make shortly. [63] In Gelyke Kanse, the previous language policy created an exclusionary hurdle, specifically for black students studying at the University of indeed if a court did not have the power to set aside a decision that is so clearly irrational.”115 [61] Daardie uitspraak handel oor die korrekte benadering ten aansien van ’n hersiening gegrond op rasionaliteit en ’n hof se bevoegdheid om irrasionele besluite tersyde te stel. Dit verskaf geen steun vir UNISA se benadering nie, vir ten minste twee redes. Eerstens moet hierdie Hof se opmerkings in Pharmaceutical Manufacturers gelees word tesame met hierdie Hof se beslissing in Simelane, waar dit bevestig is dat ’n besluit irrasioneel sal wees as die besluitnemer tersaaklike oorweginge ignoreer en sodoende tot ’n besluit kom by wyse van ’n irrasionele besluitnemingsproses. Dus, vir soverre dit die rasionaliteitsaspek van AfriForum se hersiening aanbetref, is die proses waarvolgens UNISA tot sy besluit gekom het inderdaad relevant. Die tweede probleem met UNISA se steun op Pharmaceutical Manufacturers is dat artikel 29(2) in sy eie terme uitdruklik bepaal dat die staat (in hierdie geval, UNISA)— 116 University of the Free State above n 5 at para 62. 116 University of the Free State n 5 hierbo in para 62. 117 Id at para 55. 117 Id in para 55. 60 Stellenbosch.118 The policy made black “alle redelike onderrig alternatiewe students who were not conversant in Afrikaans feel marginalised, because they could not understand the lectures presented in Afrikaans. They felt stigmatised by real-time interpretation during lectures and these students felt excluded from other aspects of campus life, including residence meetings and official university events.119 This Court identified that the previous language policy in that case created a barrier along racial lines to full access to the university’s learning and other opportunities.120 In the present instance, however, there is no suggestion that Afrikaans tuition will stigmatise students or prevent students who study in English from full access to UNISA’s learning and other opportunities. Again, there is no spectre of possible marginalisation, stigmatisation or exclusion, since there is no teaching that occurs in lecture rooms. As an aside, it is noteworthy that, as was the case in University of the Free State, here Afrikaans is being abolished completely as a language of teaching and learning. That was not the moet oorweeg . . . met inagneming van— (a) (b) (c) billikheid uitvoerbaarheid en die noodsaak om die gevolge van voorheen rasgebaseerde diskriminerende wette en praktyke reg te stel.” UNISA se suggestie dat hierdie Hof die feit dat UNISA glad nie redelike uitvoerbaarheid in oorweging gebring het toe die besluit geneem is om die taalbeleid te hersien nie, eenvoudig moet ignoreer, sal lynreg indruis teen die taal van artikel 29(2). UNISA se voorlegging op hierdie aspek is derhalwe sonder enige meriete en die aangehaalde gedeeltes is wanvoorgelig. [62] In elk geval bevestig ’n objektiewe ex post facto oorweging die korrektheid van die Hoogste Hof van Appèl se bevindinge teen UNISA. Daardie Hof het tereg bevind dat die onderhawige situasie onderskeidbaar is van die Gelyke Kanse en University of the Free State scenarios, juis omrede UNISA by 118 Gelyke Kanse above n 3 at para 28. 118 Gelyke Kanse n 3 hierbo in para 28. 119 Id. 120 Id at para 29. 119 Id. 120 Id in para 29. 61 case in Gelyke Kanse, where the university uitstek ’n afstandsonderrig instelling is. in question opted for dual medium tuition. University of the Free State het gehandel oor parallel-medium onderrig wat aanleiding [64] It nonetheless bears recognition that gegee het tot rasseskeiding in die lesingsale. it is conceivable that a language policy could Die Universiteit van die Vrystaat het sy eie affect racial tensions even in the context of taalbeleid verander omrede “die gebruik van distance-learning, as in the case of UNISA. Afrikaans . . . onopsetlik ’n fasiliteerder van It would be remiss not to acknowledge the etniese of kulturele skeiding en justified resentment that may be felt by rassespanning” in die lesingsale geword many students if their university adopts a het.116 Met ander woorde, “die gebruik van language policy that caters for only one Afrikaans as ’n parallele onderrigtaal het indigenous language. There is much to be onwetend apartheid en rassisme said for the assertion that, in the context of voort[ge]sit”.117 Daarteenoor is daar geen South Africa’s controversial history of vooruitsig dat die voortsetting van Afrikaans education and languages of learning, the as taal van onderrig en leer by UNISA language policy choice of any institution of enigsins rasseharmonie sal bedreig nie, juis learning does matter. omrede daar by UNISA geen onderrig in University of the Free State rightly lesingsale plaasvind nie. Daar kan dus emphasised “the obligation of white geensins enige besorgdheid wees oor die tipe Afrikaans speakers to ensure that their desire rasseskeiding wat ontstaan het by die to protect their language does not Universiteit van die Vrystaat nie – hierdie disadvantage others”.121 gevolgtrekking is egter onderhewig aan die kwalifikasie wat ek binnekort maak. [65] An objective assessment of the other issues that UNISA asks this Court to [63] In Gelyke Kanse het die vorige consider (without UNISA itself having taalbeleid ’n uitsluitingshekkie vir spesifiek considered them) also do not bear scrutiny. swart studente wat aan die Universiteit van These are considerations of cost, Stellenbosch gestudeer het, geskep.118 Die demographics, a “dwindling demand” for beleid het veroorsaak dat swart studente wat 121 University of the Free State above n 5 at para 87. 121 University of the Free State n 5 hierbo in para 87. 62 Afrikaans tuition, and equity. The evidence nie met Afrikaans vertroud was nie simply does not support the various gemarginaliseerd gevoel het, omdat hulle nie contentions advanced in respect of these die lesings wat in Afrikaans aangebied is aspects and the Supreme Court of Appeal’s verstaan het nie. Hulle het gestigmatiseerd findings against UNISA in this regard are gevoel deur die gelyktydige vertaling unassailable. It is not necessary to conduct gedurende lesings en hierdie studente het ook a detailed analysis of this evidence, as the uitgesluit gevoel van ander fasette van decision in this matter does not turn on the kampuslewe, insluitende koshuis evidence. A brief synopsis of the vergaderings en amptelike shortcomings will suffice. universiteitsgeleenthede.119 Hierdie Hof het uitgewys dat die vorige taalbeleid in daardie UNISA’s purported justification of saak op rassegrondslag ’n grens geskep het the impugned decision tot volle toegang tot universiteitsonderrig en Equity [66] First, there are the equity considerations. As the central normative justification, UNISA asserts that it is inequitable to continue privileging Afrikaans as a language of teaching and learning at the expense of the development of African languages. But, there is an utter dearth of evidence to show that it is tuition in Afrikaans that has prevented the development of African languages as languages of higher education. There is no evidence that the discontinuation of the one (Afrikaans tuition) is essential for the enablement of offering tuition in the other ander geleenthede.120 In die onderhawige geval, is daar egter geen suggestie dat Afrikaanse onderrig studente sal stigmatiseer, of studente wat in Engels studeer sal verhoed om volle toegang tot UNISA se onderrig en ander geleenthede te geniet nie. Daar is hier ook geen bedreiging van moontlike marginalisasie, stigmatisering en uitsluiting nie, aangesien daar geen onderrig plaasvind in lesingsale nie. Dit is terloops insiggewend dat, soos wat die geval was in University of the Free State, Afrikaans as taal van onderrig en leer hier geheel en al afgeskaf word. Dit was nie die geval in Gelyke Kanse nie, waar dubbelmedium onderrig gekies is. 63 official languages, other than English.122 Put [64] Dit moet desnieteenstaande in ag differently, there is nothing on record that geneem word dat ’n taalbeleid denkbaar precludes UNISA from offering the benefits rassespanninge kan affekteer, selfs in ’n of its new language policy to students whose afstandsonderrig milieu, soos in UNISA se first language is neither English nor geval. Dit sou onverskillig wees om nie Afrikaans, even if Afrikaans were to be erkenning te gee aan die geregverdigde retained as a language of teaching and renons wat deur baie studente ervaar mag learning. After all, the question is not word as hul universiteit ’n taalbeleid aanvaar whether it is reasonably practicable for wat vir slegs een inheemse taal voorsiening UNISA to offer tuition in all eleven official maak nie. Daar is veel te sê vir die aanname languages in all its modules.123 What must dat, in die konteks van Suid-Afrika se be determined instead, is whether it is opspraakwekkende geskiedenis van reasonably practicable to offer particular opvoeding en onderrigtale, die keuse van modules in particular languages where a taalbeleid van enige onderriginstelling wel demand exists for those modules in those saak maak. University of the Free State het languages. Since all official languages are tereg die “verpligting van wit not spoken by the same proportion of Afrikaanssprekendes om te verseker dat hul students, it may be reasonably practicable to begeerte om hul eie taal te beskerm nie offer tuition in some official languages but andere benadeel nie” benadruk.121 not in others. [65] ’n Objektiewe bepaling van die ander [67] Equity considerations may well be oorweginge wat UNISA hierdie Hof versoek met through dual medium tuition, as existed om in aanmerking te neem (sonder dat at UNISA. As this Court explicated in UNISA dit self oorweeg het) slaag ook nie University of the Free State: die toets nie. Dit is oorweginge van koste, demografie en ’n “verminderde aanvraag” 122 And, even if there were, it would not be constitutional to sacrifice one indigenous language in favour of another. 122 Selfs al was daar bewysmateriaal sou dit nie grondwetlik wees om een inheemse taal op te offer ten gunste van ’n ander inheemse taal nie. 123 The evidence is that out of a total of 2 300 modules on offer at UNISA, around 300 modules were offered in Afrikaans. 123 Die bewysmateriaal dui aan dat uit die totaal van 2 300 modules wat UNISA aanbied, omtrent 300 modules in Afrikaans aangebied word. 64 “At a conceptual level, dual medium vir Afrikaanse onderrig en leer. Die institutions might well exist without necessarily nurturing or perpetuating unfair advantage or racial discrimination and its exceedingly harmful tendencies. bewysmateriaal bied net eenvoudig geen steun vir die verskeie aannames wat voorgehou is ten aansien van hierdie aspekte nie, en die Hoogste Hof van Appèl se When that is so, then the right to be bevindinge teen UNISA in hierdie verband is taught in a language of choice could be effectively accessible and implemented. . . . Where the enjoyment of the right to be instructed in an official language of choice is achievable without onaanvegbaar. Dit is nie nodig om ’n breedvoerige ontleding van hierdie bewysmateriaal te onderneem nie, aangesien die beslissing in hierdie saak nie wentel rondom die bewysmateriaal nie. ’n Kort undermining any constitutional opsomming van die tekortkominge sal aspiration or value, then the equity test might well have been met.”124 genoegsaam wees. Cost [68] UNISA also cited cost as a consideration for why it is not reasonably practicable to continue with Afrikaans as a language of learning and tuition. It contends that the monetary savings that could be generated by using English only could be spent on developing the other official languages. Cost is a legitimate consideration in this enquiry.125 But, crucially, this aspect was not discussed at all UNISA se gepoogde regverdiging van die bestrede besluit Billikheid [66] Daar is eerstens die billikheidsoorwegings. As kern normatiewe regverdiging benadruk UNISA dat dit onbillik is om voort te gaan met die bevoorregting van Afrikaans as taal van onderrig en leer ten koste van die ontwikkeling van ander Afrikatale. Daar is egter ’n totale gebrek aan enige 124 University of the Free State above n 5 at paras 51-2. 125 In Gelyke Kanse above n 3 this Court held at para 32 that “[i]n almost any conceivable institutional management, whether in a profit-driven or no-profit enterprise, cost is an inevitable consideration”. issue of 124 University of paragrawe 51-2. the Free State n 5 hierbo in 125 In Gelyke Kanse n 3 hierbo het hierdie Hof verklaar in para 32 dat: “[i]n byna elke denkbare aspek van institusionele bestuur, hetsy in ’n winsgedrewe of nie- winsgedrewe onderneming, is koste ’n onvermydelike oorweging”. 65 at meetings of the SLC, Senate or Council. bewysmateriaal wat daarop dui dat dit There is no indication at all that UNISA ever onderrig in Afrikaans is wat die ontwikkeling assessed the commercial viability of van ander Afrikatale as tale van hoër approximately 300 modules offered in opvoedkunde kniehalter. Daar is geen Afrikaans as compared to the commercial bewysmateriaal dat die beëindiging van die viability of the total of approximately 2 300 een (Afrikaanse onderrig) wesenlik modules offered in English. Nowhere in the noodsaaklik is vir die moontlikmaking van papers is there any evidence of these cost onderrig in die ander amptelike tale, buiten considerations by the SLC, Senate or Engels, nie.122 Anders gestel – daar is niks Council. op rekord wat UNISA daarvan weerhou om die voordele van die nuwe taalbeleid aan te [69] Cross-subsidisation of the low bied aan studente wie se eerste taal nog demand modules by high demand modules Engels, nog Afrikaans is nie, selfs al word was not considered at all. Instead, in this Afrikaans behou as taal van onderrig en leer. Court, UNISA vigorously contends that “to Die vraag is per slot van sake nie of dit demand that a post-apartheid university redelik uitvoerbaar is vir UNISA om continues to subsidise the beneficiaries of onderrig in al die modules aan te bied in al historical racial privilege at the expense of elf amptelike tale nie.123 Wat eerder bepaling the broader student population” would be verg, is of dit redelik uitvoerbaar is om “fundamentally at odds with the ethos of our bepaalde modules in bepaalde tale aan te bied Constitution”. Firstly, that contention waar daar ’n vraag bestaan vir daardie represents a skewed reflection of Afrikaans modules in daardie tale. Aangesien nie alle speakers in this country, an aspect that has amptelike tale deur dieselfde verhouding been extensively addressed earlier in this studente gepraat word nie, mag dit wel judgment. Secondly, it is a bald assertion redelik uitvoerbaar wees om onderrig aan te without any substantiating evidence. It bied in sommige amptelike tale, maar nie in stands in stark contrast to the type of ander nie. evidence adduced in Gelyke Kanse where a “careful study” conducted by the University [67] Daar mag wel moontlik aan of Stellenbosch, demonstrated that tuition in billikheidsoorwegings voldoen word deur Afrikaans detracts from the development of dubbelmedium onderrig, soos wat by UNISA 66 the other official African languages as bestaan het. Soos hierdie Hof uiteengesit het languages of higher education and was in University of the Free State: therefore not reasonably practicable.126 And thirdly, it is utterly insensitive to our constitutional commitment to build “a historic bridge between the past of a deeply divided society characterised by strife, “At a conceptual level, dual medium institutions might well exist without necessarily nurturing or perpetuating unfair advantage or racial discrimination and its exceedingly conflict, untold suffering and injustice and a harmful tendencies. When that is so, future founded on the recognition of human rights, democracy and peaceful co-existence and development opportunities for all South Africans, irrespective of colour, race, class, belief or sex”.127 [70] Many of the contentions advanced in UNISA’s written submissions in this Court are not supported by any evidence on the record. Some of these contentions are: (a) that there is hardly any demand for the teaching of then the right to be taught in a language of choice could be effectively accessible and implemented . . . Where the enjoyment of the right to be instructed in an official language of choice is achievable without undermining any constitutional aspiration or value, then the equity test might well have been met.”124 126 Gelyke Kanse n 3 above at para 31 where the Court noted: 126 Gelyke Kanse n 3 hierbo in para 31 waar die Hof die volgende opgemerk het: that total about R640 million (including “The University determined by careful study immediately the cost of changing to fully parallel-medium tuition would in additional infrastructure classrooms), plus about R78 million each year thereafter for additional personnel costs. This would entail a 20% increase in fees, an additional R8 100 on top of the approximately R40 000 per year students on average pay now.” that total about R640 million (including “The University determined by careful study immediately the cost of changing to fully parallel medium tuition would in additional infrastructure classrooms), plus about R78 million each year thereafter for additional personnel costs. This would entail a 20% increase in fees, an additional R8 100 on top of the approximately R40 000 per year students on average pay now.” 127 Mureinik, citing the post-amble to the Constitution, entitled “National Unity and Reconciliation”, in Mureinik “A Bridge to Where - Introducing the Interim Bill of Rights” (1994) 10 SAJHR 31 at 31. 127 Mureinik haal die Bylae van die Grondwet genaamd “Nasionale eenheid en Versoening” aan, in Mureinik “A Bridge to Where - Introducing the Interim Bill of Rights” (1994) 10 SAJHR 31 op 31. 67 Life Sciences modules in Koste Afrikaans; (b) that UNISA will incur substantial cost when translating all tuition material from English to Afrikaans; and (c) that there is no capacity for the reconfiguration of its online learning and teaching environment to duplicate sites, so that there are both English and Afrikaans sites available in modules where Afrikaans online tuition has been discontinued since 2016. [71] Moreover, UNISA is clearly wrong when it contends that its old language policy requires it to ensure that, in every course, it has academics able to teach in Afrikaans and to assess essays and examinations in [68] UNISA het ook koste as ’n oorweging voorgehou waarom dit nie redelik uitvoerbaar is om voort te gaan met Afrikaans as taal van onderrig en leer nie. Dit voer aan dat die geldelike besparings wat gegenereer kan word deur slegs Engels te gebruik op die ontwikkeling van die ander amptelike tale bestee kan word. Koste is inderdaad ’n geldige oorweging in die onderhawige ondersoek.125 Maar, van wesenlike belang, is die feit dat hierdie aspek glad nie bespreek is tydens vergaderings van die STK, die Senaat of die Raad nie. Daar is geen aanduiding hoegenaamd dat UNISA ooit die kommersiële vatbaarheid van die aanbied van ongeveer 300 modules in Afrikaans vergelyk het met die aanbied van ongeveer 2300 modules in Engels nie. Nêrens in die stukke is daar enige bewysmateriaal van hierdie kosteoorweginge deur die STK, die Senaat of Afrikaans. It is common cause on the papers die Raad nie. that tuition would only be offered in Afrikaans in circumstances where there is adequate demand for it, and that only some 300 out of 2 300 modules were being offered in Afrikaans in 2016. That was what the former language policy entailed and that is all that was required by a reversion to that [69] Die kruis-subsidiëring van die lae aanvraag modules deur die hoë aanvraag modules is glad nie oorweeg nie. In hierdie Hof het UNISA eerder heftig betoog dat “om daarop aan te dring dat ’n post-apartheid universiteit voortgaan met die subsidiëring 68 policy, as ordered by the Supreme Court of van die begunstigdes van geskiedkundige Appeal. rasse bevoorregting ten koste van die breër studentegemeenskap” “wesenlik teenstrydig The dwindling demand for sal wees met die etos van ons Grondwet”. Afrikaans Daardie aanname is eerstens ’n verwronge [72] In respect of the alleged dwindling demand for Afrikaans tuition, the record produced in terms of rule 53 relating to requests to discontinue tuition in Afrikaans modules does not evince a material decrease in demand for Afrikaans. AfriForum cited extensive figures in this regard, but it is not necessary to delve into the minutiae. It would suffice to note that the numbers show very significant demand for distance-learning tuition in Afrikaans, representing a portion of the approximately 24 000 students who elected to study a total of almost 100 000 modules in Afrikaans in 2016. There is merit in AfriForum’s contentions that, if there had truly been a marked decline in demand for tuition in Afrikaans between 2012 and 2016, UNISA could simply have provided documentary evidence drawn from UNISA’s computer system showing the year-on-year decline. That, it failed to do. weergawe van Afrikaanssprekendes in hierdie land, ’n aspek wat alreeds breedvoerig hierin behandel is. Dit is tweedens ’n blote aanname sonder enige ondersteunende bewysmateriaal. Dit is in skrille kontras met die tipe bewysmateriaal wat in Gelyke Kanse aangebied is, waar ’n “uitvoerige studie” onderneem is deur die Universiteit van Stellenbosch, wat daarop gedui het dat onderrig in Afrikaans afbreuk doen aan die ontwikkeling van die ander nege amptelike Afrikatale as tale van hoër onderrig en derhalwe nie redelik uitvoerbaar is nie.126 En derdens is dit uiters onsensitief tot ons grondwetlike verbintenis om “’n geskiedkundige brug te bou tussen die verlede van ’n erg verdeelde samelewing wat gekenmerk is deur twis, konflik, ongekende lyding en onreg en ’n toekoms gevestig op die erkenning van menseregte, demokrasie en vreedsame naasbestaan en die ontwikkeling van geleenthede vir alle Suid-Afrikaners, ongeag kleur, ras, klas, geloof of geslag”.127 69 Demographics [70] Verskeie van die submissies [73] Lastly, in respect of demographics, UNISA outlined statistics in its answering affidavit and in its reasons for the impugned decision. The statistics relate to: voorgehou in UNISA se skriftelike betoogshoofde in hierdie Hof word nie ondersteun deur enige bewysmateriaal op die rekord nie. Sommige van hierdie submissies (a) the percentage of UNISA is: students who indicated that Afrikaans was their home language (8.6% in 2015, 8.7% in 2016 and an estimated 7.3% at some unspecified time in the future); (a) die aanbied van Lewenswetenskappe modules in Afrikaans waarvoor daar beswaarlik enige vraag is; (b) die koste van vertaling van alle onderrigmateriaal in (b) the percentage of UNISA Afrikaans; en students who registered for modules in Afrikaans (0.6% in 2015 and 0.3% in 2016, but subsequently amended to 2% in 2015 and 1% in 2016); and (c) the percentage of UNISA students who registered for at least one module in Afrikaans (5.3% in 2015 and 5.1% in 2016). [74] Mark Twain skeptically said that “facts are stubborn things, but statistics are pliable”.128 AfriForum persuasively counters UNISA’s statistics by demonstrating that: (c) die herkonfigurasie van aanlyn onderrig en leer omgewing ten einde webwerwe te dupliseer sodat daar beide Engelse en Afrikaanse webwerwe beskikbaar is in modules waar Afrikaanse aanlyn onderrig sedert 2016 gestaak is. [71] Boonop is UNISA klaarblyklik verkeerd in die betoog dat die ou taalbeleid vereis dat UNISA moet verseker dat daar in elke kursus akademici beskikbaar is wat onderrig in Afrikaans kan aanbied en wat werkstukke en eksamens in Afrikaans kan assesseer. Dit is gemeensaak op die stukke dat onderrig in Afrikaans slegs aangebied sou word in omstandighede waar daar 70 (a) the table on which the figures voldoende aanvraag daarvoor is, en dat slegs in (b) in the preceding sowat 300 uit 2 300 modules gedurende 2016 paragraph are based does not in Afrikaans aangebied is. Dit was wat die show the number of students vorige taalbeleid behels het en dit is al wat taking modules in Afrikaans at vereis is deur ’n terugkeer na daardie beleid, all, but merely the alleged soos gelas deur die Hoogste Hof van Appèl. number of modules taken in English. This means that the Die kwynende vraag vir total number of students Afrikaans cannot be discerned from the table at all; and (b) the table employed in (a) in the preceding paragraph, relating to Afrikaans home language students, is based on erroneous figures and therefore cannot be relied upon at all. [75] Overall, AfriForum pertinently disputes the statistics relied on by UNISA and comprehensively explains why the statistics did not appear to be plausible or correct. In this regard, it adduced the evidence and accompanying figures of Professors Smit and Potgieter. UNISA did not engage at all with these figures, let alone challenge them. [72] Ten aansien van die beweerde kwynende vraag vir Afrikaans, toon die rekord wat voorgelê is ingevolge Reël 53 ten opsigte van versoeke om onderrig in Afrikaanse modules te staak, geensins ’n wesenlike afname in die aanvraag vir Afrikaans nie. AfriForum het uitvoerige syfers in hierdie verband aangehaal, maar dit is nie nodig om in fynere besonderhede in te gaan nie. Dit sal voldoende wees om daarop te let dat die getalle opmerklik noemenswaardige aanvraag vir afstandsonderrig in Afrikaans aandui, verteenwoordigend van die gedeelte van die nagenoeg 24 000 studente wat in 2016 verkies het om ’n totaal van bykans 100 000 modules in Afrikaanse te studeer. Daar is heelwat te sê vir AfriForum se betoog dat, indien daar werklik ’n noemenswaardige 128 Twain “Quotable Quote” Goodreads (2021), available at https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/100106-facts-are- stubborn-things-but-statistics-are-pliable. 128 Twain “Quotable Quote” Goodreads (2021), beskikbaar by https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/100106-facts-are- stubborn-things-but-statistics-are-pliable. 71 afname vir Afrikaanse onderrig was tussen [76] To compound matters further, these 2012 en 2016, UNISA eenvoudig figures, alleged by UNISA to have formed dokumentêre bewysmateriaal vanaf sy the basis for the adoption of the new rekenaarstelsel kon voorlê om die jaar-op- language policy, were not even placed jaar afname aan te toon. UNISA het versuim before the Senate and the Council at the om dit te doen. meetings where the resolutions were taken to adopt the new language policy. UNISA Demografie admits this.129 And the Supreme Court of Appeal correctly found that to be the case.130 This approach is plainly destructive of the case sought to be advanced on these figures by UNISA. One fails to see why the SLC would see no need for the Senate and Council to have regard to these important numbers. The figures resoundingly speak of the students who would be affected by the far-reaching decisions of the Senate and the Council, in determining whether it was reasonably practicable to retain Afrikaans as a language of teaching and learning. The omission to place the statistics, which founded the recommendation to remove Afrikaans as a language of teaching and learning, before the Senate and Council, is a [73] Laastens, ten aansien van demografie, het UNISA in sy antwoordende eedsverklaring statistieke uiteengesit, asook sy redes vir die bestrede besluit. Die statistieke het betrekking op: (a) die persentasie van UNISA studente wat aangedui het dat Afrikaans hul huistaal is (8.6% in 2015, 8.7% in 2016 en ’n geraamde 7.3% op ’n ongespesifiseerde datum iewers in die toekoms); (b) die persentasie van UNISA studente wat geregistreer het vir modules in Afrikaans (0.6% in 2015 en 0.3% in 129 It was stated that “[i]t was not necessary . . . for Senate and Council to have the exact figures and percentages before them on 30 March 2016 and 28 April 2016 respectively when UNISA’s new language policy was adopted to know that the demand for Afrikaans tuition has dwindled to the extent that it had”. 129 Dit was verklaar dat “[i]t was not necessary . . . for Senate and Council to have the exact figures and percentages before them on 30 March 2016 and 28 April 2016 respectively when UNISA’s new language policy was adopted to know that the demand for Afrikaans tuition has dwindled to the extent that it had”. 130 Supreme Court of Appeal judgment above n 83 at para 41. 130 Hoogste Hof van Appèl uitspraak n 83 hierbo in para 41. 72 further fatal shortcoming in UNISA’s case. 2016, maar daarna gewysig tot The Supreme Court of Appeal, 2% in 2015 en 1% in 2016); en notwithstanding its finding that these (c) die persentasie van UNISA demographical statistics had not been placed studente wat vir ten minste een before the Senate and Council, went further module in Afrikaans to consider those figures131 and found that geregistreer het (5.3% in 2015 they did not meet the reasonable en 5.1% in 2016). practicability test in section 29(2).132 Both those findings are unassailable. [74] Mark Twain het skepties opgemerk “feite is hardkoppige dinge, maar statistieke [77] An important consideration is that at is buigbaar”.128 AfriForum het op the time of the impugned decision, oortuigende wyse UNISA se statistieke Afrikaans tuition was available to UNISA weerlê deur aan te toon dat: students for some modules. UNISA bears a (a) die tabel waarop die syfers in negative burden of establishing appropriate (b) in die voorafgaande justification for why the right to receive paragraaf gegrond is, glad nie education in the language of one’s choice, die aantal studente aantoon wat Afrikaans, should be removed. This is modules in Afrikaans neem because “when a learner already enjoys the nie, maar bloot die beweerde benefit of being taught in an official aantal modules wat in Engels language of choice, the [s]tate bears the geneem is. Dit beteken dat die negative duty not to take away or diminish totale getal studente glad nie the right without appropriate uit die tabel bepaal kan word justification”.133 To establish that nie; en 131 Id at paras 39-40. 132 Id at para 45. 131 Id in paragrawe 39-40. 132 Id in para 45. 133 Ermelo above n 84 at para 52. See also: Mazibuko v City of Johannesburg [2009] ZACC 28; 2010 (4) SA 1 (CC); 2010 (3) BCLR 239 (CC) at para 47, where this Court held: constitutional “Traditionally, rights (especially civil and political rights) are understood as imposing an obligation upon the [s]tate to refrain from interfering with the exercise of the right by citizens 133 Ermelo n 84 hierbo in para 52. Sien ook: Mazibuko v City of Johannesburg [2009] ZACC 28; 2010 (4) SA 1 (CC); 2010 (3) BCLR 239 (CC) in para 47, waar hierdie Hof verklaar: constitutional rights “Traditionally, (especially civil and political rights) are understood as imposing an obligation upon the State to refrain from interfering 73 appropriate justification, UNISA is (b) die tabel aangewend in (a) in constrained to demonstrate that it would not die voorafgaande paragraaf be “reasonably practicable” to continue with wat betrekking het op Afrikaans as a language of learning and Afrikaanse huistaal studente, tuition, or put differently, that it is not gebaseer is op foutiewe syfers reasonably capable of doing so. To give en gevolglik glad nie op meaningful effect to the right in gesteun kan word nie. section 29(2), all reasonable educational alternatives had to be taken into account and [75] As geheel, het AfriForum pertinent considerations of equity, practicability and die statistieke waarop UNISA steun, betwis the need to redress the consequences of our en het breedvoerig verduidelik waarom die apartheid past, must feature prominently. statistieke nie aanneemlik of korrek blyk te For the reasons set out, UNISA failed to do wees nie. In hierdie verband het dit die so. getuienis en gepaardgaande syfers van Professore Smit en Potgieter aangebied. [78] To summarise: UNISA patently UNISA het glad nie hierdie syfers misconstrued the applicability of the aangespreek nie, en dit nog minder betwis. provisions of section 29(2) to it as an organ of state. This resulted in its failure to have [76] Om sake te vererger, is hierdie syfers, regard to the considerations listed in wat UNISA beweer die basis vorm van die section 29(2) when the impugned decision aanvaarding van die nuwe taalbeleid, nooit was taken. UNISA failed to put up evidence eers voor die Senaat en die Raad geplaas by in support of its averment that it had taken die vergaderings waar die resolusies into account these considerations. In any aangeneem is om die nuwe taalbeleid te event, an objective assessment of the factors aanvaar nie. UNISA erken dit.129 En die (the so-called negative obligation or the duty to respect). As this court has held, in Jaftha v most notably perhaps Schoeman, social and economic rights are no different. The [s]tate bears a duty to refrain from interfering with social and economic rights just as it does with civil and political rights.” with the exercise of the right by citizens (the so-called negative obligation or the duty to respect). As this court has held, most notably perhaps in Jaftha v Schoeman, social and economic rights are no different. The State bears a duty to refrain from interfering with social and economic rights just as it does with civil and political rights.” 74 that UNISA asks this Court to take into Hoogste Hof van Appèl het tereg bevind dat account (without UNISA itself having dit wel die geval is.130 Hierdie benadering is considered them), does not bear out its case onteenseglik vernietigend van die saak wat that it was not reasonably practicable for UNISA probeer uitmaak op grond van UNISA to continue to offer tuition in hierdie syfers. Dit is geheel en al onduidelik Afrikaans. UNISA’s decision in 2016 to waarom die STK nie die nodigheid gesien het adopt the new language policy, and dat die Senaat en die Raad insae moet lewer discontinue Afrikaans as a language of in hierdie belangrike syfers nie. Die syfers learning and teaching, therefore contravened spreek boekdele aangaande die studente wat section 29(2) of the Constitution, rendering geraak sou word deur die verreikende that decision invalid. The Supreme Court of besluite van die Senaat en die Raad, om te Appeal was correct in setting aside the 2016 bepaal of dit redelik uitvoerbaar was om decision to adopt a new language policy. Afrikaans te behou as ’n taal van onderrig en This is dispositive of the case, although the leer. Die versuim om die statistieke question whether UNISA’s decision onderliggend aan die aanbeveling om complied with procedural requirements will Afrikaans te verwyder as taal van onderrig en bear some consideration when the remedy is leer voor die Senaat en die Raad te plaas, is discussed. What then, must be done about ’n verdere noodlottige tekortkoming in UNISA’s failure to comply with UNISA se saak. Die Hoogste Hof van Appèl section 29(2) since it changed its language het, nieteenstaande sy bevinding dat hierdie policy in 2016? demografiese statistieke nie voor die Senaat Remedy [79] The relevant terms of the Supreme Court of Appeal’s order have been set out.134 This Court issued directions, calling for submissions regarding the practicalities of implementing the Supreme Court of Appeal’s order. UNISA’s response was en die Raad geplaas is nie, verder gegaan om oorweging te skenk aan die syfers131 en het bevind dat dit nie voldoen aan die redelik uitvoerbaarheidstoets in artikel 29(2) nie.132 Beide hierdie bevindinge is onaanvegbaar. [77] ’n Belangrike oorweging is dat Afrikaanse onderrig ten tyde van die bestrede 134 See [16]. 134 Sien [16]. 75 somewhat disappointing in respect of the besluit beskikbaar was aan UNISA studente detail provided. UNISA points out that vir sommige modules. UNISA dra ’n five years have now elapsed since the negatiewe las om behoorlik te regverdig decision to abolish Afrikaans as a language waarom die reg tot onderrig in jou taalkeuse, of teaching and learning. The order requires Afrikaans, verwyder behoort te word. Dit is UNISA to continue to offer all modules in die geval omrede “wanneer ’n leerder alreeds Afrikaans that were available in Afrikaans in die voordeel geniet om in ’n amptelike taal 2016. UNISA emphasises that there have van keuse onderrig te word, die staat die been numerous curriculum changes during negatiewe verpligting het om nie daardie reg the past five years. Courses and course weg te neem of te verminder sonder materials have changed and there may also behoorlike regverdiging nie”.133 Ten einde no longer be a demand for some of the daardie behoorlike regverdiging te bewys, courses. word daar van UNISA verwag om aan te toon dat dit nie “redelik uitvoerbaar” sal [80] There is some merit in these wees om voort te gaan met Afrikaans as taal submissions. But the contention, that the van onderrig en leer, of anders gestel, dat dit order requires UNISA to move beyond the nie redelik in staat is om so te doen nie. Ten status quo as it prevailed in 2016, is einde betekenisvolle effek te gee aan die reg fallacious. All that is required in terms of the in artikel 29(2), moet alle redelike order, is for UNISA to reinstate those opvoedkundige alternatiewe in aanmerking Afrikaans modules that were still on offer at geneem word en oorweginge van billikheid, that time. It does not require the university uitvoerbaarheid en die noodsaak om die to reinstate Afrikaans modules that had gevolge van ons apartheid verlede reg te stel, already been discontinued under the moet ’n prominente rol speel. Vir die redes Guidelines. alreeds uiteengesit, het UNISA versuim om [81] There can be no quarrel with dit te doen. AfriForum’s submissions that the [78] Om op te som: UNISA het ooglopend Constitution requires that the consequences die toepaslikheid van die bepalings van of constitutional invalidity be corrected or artikel 29(2) op dit, as staatsorgaan, reversed where it can no longer be misverstaan. Dit het aanleiding gegee tot die 76 prevented,135 and that where constitutional versuim om ag te slaan op die oorweginge rights are violated, as is the case here, the vervat in artikel 29(2) toe die bestrede besluit relief must effectively vindicate those geneem is. UNISA het versuim om enige rights.136 But for an order to be effective, it bewysmateriaal voor te hou ter must be reasonably capable of ondersteuning van die bewering dat dit wel implementation. It cannot be seriously hierdie oorweginge in ag geneem het. In elk disputed that, as UNISA points out, it will geval steun die objektiewe evaluering van have to prepare comprehensive measures to die feite wat UNISA hierdie Hof versoek om reinstate the relevant Afrikaans modules. in aanmerking te neem (sonder dat UNISA And those measures must self-evidently be self dit oorweeg het), nie sy saak dat dit nie implemented at the beginning of an redelik uitvoerbaar was vir UNISA om voort academic year. This would require an te gaan met onderrig in Afrikaans nie. assessment of personnel and information UNISA se besluit in 2016 om die nuwe technology infrastructure adaptations and taalbeleid te aanvaar, en om Afrikaans as taal related costs, translation and printing costs van onderrig en leer te staak, het derhalwe and budget re-assessments – in the face of artikel 29(2) van die Grondwet oortree, wat substantial cutbacks in tertiary education daardie besluit ongeldig maak. Die Hoogste funding by government. Hof van Appèl het tereg die 2016 besluit om ’n nuwe taalbeleid te aanvaar tersyde gestel. [82] UNISA’s case is that if, after re- Dit is deurslaggewend in hierdie saak, assessing its budget and the requirements of alhoewel die vraag of UNISA se besluit the judgment (on the assumption that this voldoen aan prosedurele vereistes weliswaar appeal on the merits is dismissed), it oorweging sal moet geniet wanneer die concludes that it is reasonably practicable to remedie bespreek word. Wat moet dan nou reinstate the 2010 language policy Afrikaans gedoen word met UNISA se versuim om te modules, the requisite personnel recruitment 135 AfriForum cites Allpay Consolidated Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Chief Executive Officer, South African Social Security Agency [2013] ZACC 42; 2014 (4) SA 179 (CC); 2014 (1) BCLR 1 (CC) at para 29. 135 AfriForum verwys na Allpay Consolidated Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Chief Executive Officer, South African Social Security Agency [2013] ZACC 42; 2014 (4) SA 179 (CC); 2014 (1) BCLR 1 (CC) in para 29. 136 Reliance is placed on Steenkamp N.O. v Provincial Tender Board, Eastern Cape [2006] ZACC 16; 2007 (3) SA 121 (CC); 2007 (3) BCLR 300 (CC) at para 29. 136 Daar word gesteun op Steenkamp N.O. v Provincial Tender Board, Eastern Cape [2006] ZACC 16; 2007 (3) SA 121 (CC); 2007 (3) BCLR 300 (CC) in para 29. 77 and information technology infrastructure voldoen aan artikel 29(2) met die changes must be timeously effected in order verandering van sy taalbeleid in 2016? to re-introduce Afrikaans as a primary language of teaching and learning at the Remedie commencement of an academic year. But, on the other hand, contends UNISA, if after this exercise it becomes evident that it is not reasonably practicable to reinstitute the 2010 language policy, it will have to re-design a new constitutionally compliant policy and implement that new policy with the necessary personnel and infrastructure changes at the beginning of an academic year. [83] The changes postulated by UNISA, on either scenario, are self-evidently far-reaching and will consume substantial time. The estimate of a six-month planning period for implementation prior to the start of an academic year is not unreasonable. UNISA is a very large organisation. The order of the Supreme Court of Appeal, that [79] Die tersaaklike bepalings van die Hoogste Hof van Appèl se bevel is alreeds uiteengesit.134 Hierdie hof het skriftelike voorleggings aangevra aangaande die praktiese uitvoerbaarheid van die Hoogste Hof van Appèl se bevel. UNISA se reaksie was ietwat teleurstellend ten opsigte van die gegewens wat verskaf is. UNISA wys daarop dat daar nou alreeds vyf jaar verstryk het sedert die besluit om weg te doen met Afrikaans as taal van onderrig en leer. Die bevel vereis van UNISA om alle modules wat in 2016 in Afrikaans beskikbaar was aan te bied in daardie taal. UNISA beklemtoon dat daar verskeie kurrikulum veranderinge plaasgevind het gedurende die afgelope vyf jaar. Kursusse en kursus materiaal het verander en daar mag verder moontlik ook geen aanvraag meer wees vir sommige van this Court is endorsing, is far-reaching. A die kursusse nie. pragmatic and effective order must reasonably enable UNISA to navigate properly on the course it chooses. And it is not for this Court to order what it should do. It may insist on a language policy that jettisons Afrikaans as a language of teaching and learning, after complying with all the 78 [80] Daar is meriete in hierdie submissies. Die betoog dat die bevel van UNISA vereis om verder te gaan as die status quo soos dit in 2016 bestaan het, is egter onontvanklik. Al wat ingevolge daardie bevel vereis word, constitutional and legal precepts, or decide is vir UNISA om die Afrikaanse modules wat to properly reinstate the status quo as it op daardie stadium steeds aangebied was, prevailed in 2016 before the impugned weer in te stel. Dit vereis nie van UNISA om language policy was adopted. In any case, it Afrikaanse modules wat alreeds ingevolge is not for this Court to order what it should die Riglyne gestaak is, weer in te stel nie. do – to act appropriately. Any attempt to be prescriptive as to the choice UNISA makes [81] Daar kan nie gekibbel word met will be tantamount to judicial overreach, AfriForum se submissies dat die Grondwet bearing in mind that, as stated, UNISA is an vereis dat die gevolge van grondwetlike organ of state. ongeldigheid gekorrigeer of omver gewerp word waar dit nie meer verhoed kan word [84] Courts must remain within the nie,135 en dat waar grondwetlike regte bounds the Constitution sets for them.137 In geskend word, soos wat hier die geval is, die Glenister, this Court stated that: remedie effektiewelik daardie regte moet “In our constitutional democracy, the courts are the ultimate guardians of the Constitution. They not only have the right to intervene in order to prevent the violation of the bekragtig.136 Maar alvorens ’n bevel effektief kan wees, moet dit geredelikerwys vatbaar wees vir implementering. Dit kan nie ernstig betwis word dat, soos UNISA uitwys, dit omvattende maatreëls sal moet Constitution, they also have the duty voorberei ten einde die tersaaklike to do so. It is in the performance of this role that courts are more likely to confront the question of whether to venture into the domain of other branches of government and the extent of such intervention. It is a Afrikaanse modules terug te plaas. Daardie maatreëls moet vanselfsprekend ingestel word by die aanvang van ‘n akademiese jaar. Dit sal ’n evaluasie van personeel en inligtingstegnologie infrastruktuur necessary component of the aanpassings en aanverwante kostes, vertaling doctrine of separation of powers en drukwerk kostes en her-evaluasies van die 137 Mwelase v Director-General, Department of Rural Development and Land Reform [2019] ZACC 30; 2019 (6) SA 597 (CC); 2019 (11) BCLR 1358 (CC) at paras 50-3, where this Court cited Glenister v President of the Republic of South Africa [2008] ZACC 19; 2009 (1) SA 287 (CC); 2009 (2) BCLR 136 (CC) at para 21. 137 Mwelase v Director-General, Department of Rural Development and Land Reform [2019] ZACC 30; 2019 (6) SA 597 (CC); 2019 (11) BCLR 1358 (CC) in paragrawe 50-3, waar hierdie Hof Glenister v President of the Republic of South Africa [2008] ZACC 19; 2009 (1) SA 287 (CC); 2009 (2) BCLR 136 (CC) in para 21 aangehaal het. 79 that courts have a constitutional begroting verg, in ’n milieu van omvattende obligation to ensure that the exercise of power by other branches of government occurs within constitutional bounds. But even in these circumstances, courts must besnoeings in die regering se befondsing van tersiêre onderwys. [82] UNISA se saak is dat indien, na her- observe the limits of their evaluering van sy begroting en die vereistes powers.”138 [85] In this instance, UNISA as an organ of state must be afforded the deference to do the necessary feasibility investigations, take the decision it regards as most reasonably practicable and implement the required changes. If its decision is to design a new language policy, it must self-evidently comply with section 29(2). But there is a further caveat. UNISA plainly failed to follow its own internal processes when it took the impugned decision. So, for example: (a) Senate failed to comply with its Rule 11.1, by sending out the draft language policy late to members of the Senate;139 and (b) The resolution regarding language policy was not van hierdie uitspraak (op die veronderstelling dat die appèl misluk op die meriete), dit tot die slotsom kom dat dit redelik uitvoerbaar is om die pre-2016 beleid (dus die 2010 beleid) se Afrikaanse modules weer in te stel, die nodige personeel werwing en inligtingstegnologie infrastruktuur veranderinge tydig verrig moet word om Afrikaans as primêre taal van onderrig en leer terug te plaas teen die aanvang van ’n akademiese jaar. Maar aan die ander kant, betoog UNISA, sou dit na hierdie oefening blyk dat dit nie redelik uitvoerbaar wees om die 2010 taalbeleid weer in te stel nie, dit ’n nuwe beleid wat aan die Grondwet voldoen sal moet herontwerp en daardie nuwe beleid met die nodige personeel en infrastruktuur veranderinge by die aanvang van ’n nuwe akademiese jaar sal moet implementeer. 138 Glenister id at para 33. 138 Glenister id in para 33. 139 Rule 11.1 of the Senate Rules provides that the agenda and all related documents of each meeting must be submitted to the members of Senate five working days before the meeting. 139 Reël 11.1 van die Senaat Reëls bepaal dat die agenda en alle verwante dokumente van elke vergadering voorgelê moet word vir die lede van die Senaat binne vyf werksdae voor die vergadering. 80 adopted by a show of hands at [83] Die veranderinge wat UNISA the meeting of the Senate. voorhou, is op iedere scenario This constitutes vanselfsprekend verreikend en sal non-compliance with Rule aansienlike tyd in beslag neem. Die raming 13.1.140 van ’n ses-maande beplanningsperiode vir implementering voor die aanvang van ’n [86] The Senate Rules were plainly not akademiese jaar is nie onredelik nie. UNISA complied with when the resolution to is ’n baie groot instansie. Die bevel van die recommend a new language policy was Hoogste Hof van Appèl wat hierdie Hof nou taken. This invalidated the resolution of bekragtig is verreikend. ’n Pragmatiese en Senate, and it had a domino effect on the effektiewe bevel moet redelikerwys vir validity of the resolution of Council, since UNISA in staat stel om behoorlik te navigeer section 27(2) of the Act provides that op die roete wat dit kies. En dit is nie vir Council must determine a language policy hierdie Hof om voor te skryf wat UNISA “with the concurrence of the Senate”. moet doen nie – om behoorlik op te tree as UNISA will no doubt be mindful of these dit aandring op ’n taalbeleid wat Afrikaans shortcomings if it chooses to fashion a new laat vaar as taal van onderrig en leer nadat dit language policy. voldoen het aan al die grondwetlike en regsvoorskrifte, of om die status quo soos dit [87] Having regard to the constraints was in 2016 voordat die bestrede taalbeleid placed on this Court in respect of the aangeneem is, weer in te stel. Enige poging principles of the separation of powers, a om voorskriftelik te wees ten aansien van suspended order is called for here. UNISA se keuse sal neerkom op geregtelike oorskryding, inaggenome die feit dat, soos [88] The following order is made: aangedui, UNISA ’n staatsorgaan is. 1. Leave to appeal is granted. 140 Rule 13.1 of the Senate Rules provides that, unless provided otherwise by the rules, resolutions of the Senate and its Committees are adopted by a majority of the members present and a show of hands. 140 Reël 13.1 van die Senaat Reëls bepaal dat, tensy geen ander voorsiening in die reëls gemaak word nie, die resolusie van die Senaat en die Komitees aanvaar word deur ’n meerderheid van die lede teenwoordig deur die opsteek van hande. 81 2. Save as set out below, the [84] Howe moet binne die grense bly wat appeal is dismissed. die Grondwet vir hulle stel.137 In Glenister, 3. The order of the Supreme het hierdie Hof verklaar dat: Court of Appeal is suspended until the commencement of the University of South Africa’s 2023 academic year. 4. In the event that the University “In our constitutional democracy, the courts are the ultimate guardians of the Constitution. They not only have the right to intervene in order to prevent the violation of the of South Africa decides to Constitution, they also have the duty continue with the language policy adopted in 2016, the requirements of section 29(2) of the Constitution must be complied with. to do so. It is in the performance of this role that courts are more likely to confront the question of whether to venture into the domain of other branches of government and the extent of such intervention. It is a 5. If, by the commencement of necessary component of the doctrine the 2023 academic year, the University of South Africa decides to adopt an entirely new language policy, the order of separation of powers that courts have a constitutional obligation to ensure that the exercise of power by other branches of government occurs within constitutional bounds. But of the Supreme Court of even in these circumstances, courts Appeal, save for the costs must observe the limits of their order, will fall away. powers.”138 6. The University of South Africa must pay AfriForum’s costs in this Court, including the costs of two counsel. [85] In hierdie geval moet UNISA, as ’n staatsorgaan, die verskuldigde eerbied betoon word om die nodige vatbaarheidsondersoeke te doen, die besluit te neem wat dit as die mees redelik uitvoerbaar beskou, en die vereiste veranderinge te implementeer. As UNISA besluit om ’n nuwe taalbeleid te ontwerp, 82 moet dit uiteraard voldoen aan artikel 29(2). Maar daar is ’n verdere voorbehoud. UNISA het klaarblyklik versuim om sy eie interne prosesse te volg toe dit die bestrede besluit geneem het. Byvoorbeeld: (a) Die Senaat het versuim om te voldoen aan Reël 11.1, deur die konsepbeleid laat uit te stuur aan lede van die Senaat;139 (b) Die resolusie aangaande taalbeleid was nie aanvaar deur die opsteek van hande by die Senaatsvergadering nie. Dit kom neer op nie-voldoening aan Reël 13.1.1.140 [86] Daar was onteenseglik geen voldoening aan die Senaat se Reëls toe die resolusie aanvaar is om ’n nuwe taalbeleid aan te beveel nie. Dit het die Senaat se resolusie ongeldig gemaak, en het ’n domino effek gehad op die geldigheid van die Raad se resolusie, aangesien artikel 27(2) van die Wet op Hoër Onderwys bepaal dat die Raad ’n taalbeleid moet neerlê “met die samestemming van die Senaat”. UNISA sal ongetwyfeld bewus wees van hierdie tekortkominge as dit besluit om ’n nuwe taalbeleid te skep. 83 [87] Inaggenome die beperkinge op hierdie Hof ingevolge die beginsels van die skeiding van magte, is ’n opskortingsbevel hier aangewese. [88] Die volgende bevel word uitgereik: 1. Verlof tot appèl word toegestaan. 2. Behalwe soos hieronder uiteengesit, word die appèl van die hand gewys. 3. Die bevel van die Hoogste Hof van Appèl word opgeskort tot die aanvang van die Universiteit van Suid-Afrika se 2023 akademiese jaar. 4. Indien die Universiteit van Suid- Afrika besluit om voort te gaan met die taalbeleid wat in 2016 aanvaar is, moet die vereistes van artikel 29(2) van die Grondwet nagekom word. 5. Indien, teen die aanvang van die 2023 akademiese jaar, die Universiteit van Suid-Afrika besluit om ‘n heeltemal nuwe taalbeleid te aanvaar, sal die bevel van die Hoogste Hof van Appèl, behalwe vir die kostebevel, wegval. 84 6. Die Universiteit van Suid-Afrika moet AfriForum se koste in hierdie Hof betaal, insluitende die koste van twee advokate. 85 For the Applicants/Vir die Applikante: M Chaskalson SC and/en CP Wesley instructed by Motalane Incorporated/in opdrag van Motalane Ingelyf For the Respondent/Vir die Respondent: A Cockrell SC and/en A D’Oliveira instructed Spies Incorporated/in opdrag van Hurter Spies Ingelyf Hurter by