PHSG Part 13 | School Capture

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL GRANTS PRETORIA GIRLS LEAVE TO APPEAL

RICHARD WILKINSON

14 APRIL 2026

On 18 March 2026, the Supreme Court of Appeal granted the School Governing Body of Pretoria High School for Girls leave to appeal against a judgment of Judge Moshoana in the North Gauteng High Court. The school will now be able to challenge his refusal of its Rule 53 application to compel the release of the Mdladlamba Report on Racism for public scrutiny.

This is an immensely important development that brings us materially closer to securing the legal report relied upon to charge the school’s principal, Mrs Erasmus, with serious misconduct.

A recap of events

This long and complex matter began in July 2024, when 12 Matric girls were suspended from Pretoria High School for Girls and, at the behest of the Gauteng Department of Education, subjected to highly publicised disciplinary hearings. The allegations centred on their purported participation in a “whites-only” WhatsApp group said to contain racist messages. That characterisation was unfounded. The messages in question reflected complaints by the girls about what they experienced as persistent race-baiting at the school. In early August 2024, they were found not guilty on all charges and were fully exonerated.

Infuriated by this acquittal, the Gauteng Department of Education initiated its own inquiry, alleging that a broader “culture of racism” that exists at Pretoria Girls. It appointed an attorney, Mr Mdladlamba of Mdladlamba Inc, to conduct a 14-day investigation under wide-ranging terms of reference. More than three months later, he reported that he had identified serious misconduct at the school and recommended that the principal, Mrs Erasmus, together with several other staff members, be charged.

Mrs Erasmus was subsequently charged with three counts of misconduct:

The first concerned her handling of the WhatsApp group after its existence came to light in 2023.
The second alleged that she failed to provide proper advice to the governing body regarding the appointment of the school’s finance manager.
The third related to the alleged misuse of school property by her husband, Mr Erasmus, who used a school vehicle to collect gardening equipment for use on the school grounds. At the time, Mr Erasmus had been volunteering – with the knowledge and support of the school governing body – to maintain the school’s rose garden.

Mrs Erasmus was acquitted of the first charge relating to the WhatsApp group, as would be expected given the finding that the group contained no objectionable content. She was initially found guilty of misconduct in relation to the appointment of the school’s finance manager, but that finding was overturned on internal appeal. She was, however, found guilty in respect of the third charge concerning her husband’s work in the rose garden. This finding is now the subject of a dispute before the Education Labour Relations Council.

Quite what any of these charges have to do with allegations of racism remains unclear.

Astonishingly, the Gauteng Department of Education has never released Mr Mdladlamba’s report – not even to those directly implicated. As a result, Mrs Erasmus has been denied the opportunity to scrutinise its contents or respond to its allegations.

Last year, the School Governing Body of Pretoria Girls approached the North Gauteng High Court in Pretoria, seeking an order in terms of Rule 53 of the Uniform Rules of Court compelling the Department to disclose the report. The purpose of that application was to enable the School Governing Body to challenge its contents and to seek the review and setting aside of both the report and the decision to subject Mrs Erasmus to a disciplinary hearing.

The application was, however, dismissed by Judge Moshoana in the North Gauteng High Court. To say that legal experts were surprised by this ruling would be an understatement. Our law simply does not contemplate the idea that a litigant is not permitted to have sight of a report which he or she is seeking to have reviewed.

In December 2025, the School Governing Body’s legal representatives applied to the Supreme Court of Appeal for leave to appeal against the order of the North Gauteng High Court. That application has now been granted.

One step closer in the fight for transparency and accountability

The wheels of justice continue to turn slowly. It is likely that the appeal will only be heard by the Supreme Court of Appeal in the first half of 2027. Should the Court rule in favour of Pretoria High School for Girls and compel the Gauteng Department of Education to release Mr Mdladlamba’s report, there will at last be an opportunity to assess the evidence and reasoning said to justify the charges of serious misconduct against Mrs Erasmus.

The next step would then be for the school to return to the North Gauteng High Court to seek an order reviewing and setting aside both the Mdladlamba report and the decision to institute disciplinary proceedings against Mrs Erasmus.

It is important to note that leave to appeal was granted by two judges directly to the Supreme Court of Appeal. In many cases, an appeal is first directed to a full bench of the High Court. Here, however, the matter has been escalated straight to the Supreme Court of Appeal. This suggests that the Court regards the issues at stake as sufficiently serious to warrant its immediate attention.

Coincidentally, the MEC for Education who precipitated this debacle – Matome Chiloane – has recently been removed from his position by Premier Panyaza Lesufi. Whether his successor, Lebogang Maile, will take a more measured approach remains to be seen.

Meanwhile, Mrs Erasmus’ defamation claim against Edwin Naidu and the publisher of Inside Education is ongoing. In November 2024, Mr Naidu published an article in which he stated the following:

“The episode of Ms Erasmus is just one recent example of racism that continues to rear its ugly head. But apart from putting her in the dock and making an example of the racism that exists in society, there is nothing done to lance the racism boil. How many other principals like Ms Erasmus continue to escape without having their racism addressed?”

The matter is expected to proceed in the North Gauteng High Court, most likely in 2027.

None of this would have been possible without the exceptional skill, tenacity and generosity of Advocate John Mullins SC and his colleagues at the Pretoria Bar. Their efforts – undertaken on a pro bono basis – reflect South African lawyers at their best, in a saga that has also revealed instances of the legal profession at its worst. This fight has been long and hard, but it has been worth it, for I am confident that the conduct of the Gauteng Department of Education will eventully be tested and brought to light through the courts.