Terugvoer van ondersoek na Daveyton-leerders verdrink

GAUTENG. – Siphamandla Peterson (15) en Sibusiso Sibiya (17) van Daveyton Skills School het op Maandag 15 April tydens ‘n skoolkamp by Roack Falls Adventure Ranch in Centurion verdrink.

Steve Mabona, woordvoerder vir die onderwysdepartement, sê Matoma Chiloane, die LUR vir onderwys, sport, kuns, kultuur en ontspanning het gister die oorledenes se families besoek en die ondersoekende verslag van die voorval met hulle gedeel. Daarna is die skool besoek sodat bevindinge met die skool se bestuur en beheerliggaam gedeel kon word.

Die kinders sou die kamp van Rising Stars Generation vanaf 12 April tot 15 April 2024 bywoon. Die departement is van twee leerders se verdrinking in kennis gestel. Seanego Attorneys Inc. het die aangeleentheid as onafhanklike regsfirma ondersoek en bevindinge gemaak.

“Ons is tevrede met die bevindings en aanbevelings deur Seanego Prokureurs. Die departement is vasbeslote om al die aanbevole aksies dienooreenkomstig te implementeer. Die skoolhoof is as voorsorgmaatreël, hangende ‘n verhoor, na die distrik oorgeplaas, aangesien die ondersoekverslag aanbeveel dat sy aangekla word. Ons pleit by alle Gautengse skole om die nodige protokol te prioritiseer wanneer daar vir uitstappies voorberei word ter beveiliging van die lewens van leerders,” het die LUR, Chiloane, gesê.

Lees die volledige veslag hier onder.

Seanego Atorneys Inc. investigative report and recommendations:

There is some uncertainty regarding the precise circumstances which took place around the Incident on 15 April 2024. This is because we were presented with versions from various persons that attended the discipline Camp and obtained similar, but somewhat different versions regarding the circumstances around the Incident of 15 April 2024. Based on the versions presented: –

• the Incident most likely took place after 14h00 in the afternoon of 15 April 2024;
• the usual activities were taking place at the discipline Camp i.e.
  Learners went to do their laundry, had just finished up a lesson on
  the car engine with Mr. Motlou, were sleeping and others were
  cooking. Most of the facilitators were scattered around the Camp;
• a group of Learners began to swim in the Dam for a short while (after either requesting permission from Mr. Motlou to swim and being refused OR after being given permission to swim by Mr. Motlou);
• Sibusiso and Siphamandla were among the group of Learners that went for a swim in the Dam;
• Siphamandla was drowning, when Sibusiso tried to save him. In the process, Sibusiso drowned as well. Both learners drowned and died;
• Learners that were around and inside the Dam were screaming, shouting and pointing at the spot where the Deceased Learners disappeared;
• Mr. Motlou and some of his facilitators (who heard shouting and were led to the Dam) jumped into the Dam and attempted to save the Learners. One of the facilitators almost drowned in the process,
  however, he was saved and subsequently resuscitated;
• at some point while the Incident took place, 2 (two) other facilitators ran and informed the Camp owner of the Incident and a request to him was made for the Dam to be drained urgently. The Camp owner raised some concerns about a drainage and did not accede to the request; and
• the emergency services, including police divers arrived and the Dam area was evacuated. The bodies of Sibusiso and Siphamandla were later recovered and, after the paramedic conducted the signs of life checks, the Learners were pronounced dead.
• Whether approval was granted for the trip
• No approval was granted by the Department. The School did not submit any application for the trip as required in terms of Regulation 7 of the Tour Regulations on Domestic and International Tours for
  Learners at Public Schools. Crucial safety measures were, as a result, not adhered to by the School, and which could not be identified and corrected by the Department
• Who was going to be responsible for supervising the Learners
• The Principal instructed that only the Social Worker accompany the Learners and supervise them at the Camp. There were no educators that were invited or appointed to attend the Camp with the Learners. There were approximately 19 (nineteen) facilitators from Rising Stars that attended the Camp with the Learners. This was not in accordance with the educator-learner ratio prescribed by the Tour Regulations i.e. at least one male educator accompanies every 20 (twenty) male Learners and at least one female educator accompanies every 20 (twenty) female Learners or part thereof.[2]
  Where were the responsible personnel and educators at the time of the Incident
• There were no educators that were appointed and/or invited to the Camp to supervise the Learners. The Social Worker, being the one person from the School appointed by the Principal to attend and
  supervise the Learners, was allegedly in the restroom when she heard the commotion. The facilitators from Rising Stars were scattered around the Camp area but not by the Dam when the
  Incident took place (drowning of the Learners).
• Whether the School and the Camp site has insurance
• According to the attorney representing the owner of the Camp site, Mr. Gerhard Wagenaar, they only have insurance on the building, but he did not elaborate further.
• The School has insurance with SANTAM, and according to the Principal the premiums are up to date and the cover is valid. The insurance covers among others, the death of a scholar.
• The conduct of the educators, the SMT and the Principal
• There were no educators that accompanied the Learners at the discipline Camp. They were neither invited nor involved with the planning or implementation of the discipline Camp.
• The conduct of the Principal is concerning. She did not obtain the requisite approval from the Department for the trip. As a result, various safety measures were not adhered to and the Department did not have an opportunity to rectify the lack of safety measures. She only sent one Social Worker to accompany and supervise the Learners from the School at the Camp. She failed to comply with the requisite educator-learner ratio in terms of the Tour Regulations. She relied on Mr. Motlou and the facilitators of Rising Stars, who do not qualify as ‘educators’ in accordance with the Tour Regulations. She did not verify their qualifications and presented them to the parents
  as ‘specialists’.[3] The Principal failed to inform the parents of the risks associated with the activities that were to be undertaken by the Learners. She was remiss in her duties as the Principal of the School.
• The Principal’s reason for not complying with the Regulations is that she did not know about these Regulations. We find her version concerning, especially because there were at least 2 (two) occasions
  whereby the Department emphasised the importance of complying with the Regulations i.e. making a formal application 3 (three) months prior to the trip. This was through an Internal Memo: Regulations on excursions and School tours dated 28 January 2020 addressed to all public school Principals and SGB Chairperson. It was more recently through a Memo 56/2024: Tours Submission Approvals dated 31 January 2024 which was addressed to all Principals, including the Principal of the School. We were provided with the email attaching the Memo with the details of all the recipients. We can confirm that Daveyton SkillsSchool was included in the list of recipients,
  addressed to the Principal on 30 January 2024. To add further, we also received a copy of the acknowledgment of the Memo signed bythe Principal dated 5 February 2024. The memo is clear and urged Schools to obtain departmental approval for a tour through an application to the District Director at least 3 (three) months prior to the departure date of the tour. It also further attached a checklist and stressed that for the learners’ protection, the checklist must be adhered to and no tour applications will be signed by the District Director if they do not adhere to the checklist. Finally, as a Principal of a public school, she ought to have familiarised herself with regulations as published in the gazette by the Department from time to time.
• The SMT members had no role in the planning of the trip and were merely informed about the trip by the Principal. They also had no role in the preparation and implementation of the Business Plan.
  Whether the matter was reported to the Department, the cause of the death of the Learners
• The Principal reported the Incident to the Department 15 April 2024.
• An Incident report dated 29 April 2024 was compiled and signed by the Social Worker on the School letterhead. When we consulted with the officials from the Department, we were informed that the report was also shared with them.
• We cannot at this stage confirm the cause of death of the Learners as we did not have sight of the post-mortem reports at the time this Report was finalised.[4] Whether the Department is liable or not
• Section 60 of the South African Schools Act 84 of 1996 (“SASA”) provides that the state is liable for any Damage or loss caused as a result of any act or omission in connection with any educational
  activity conducted by a public School and for which such a public School would have been liable but for the provisions of this section.
• The law firm did not opine on the prospects (if any) of any claim that may be instituted.
• Whether the Department may be liable or not will be determined by the relevant court, taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the matter.
  Whether or not there was any omission on the part of the Department or its official and what the Department can do to address the problem
• The Department, through the District, signed (in November 2023) and approved (on 11 December 2023) a Business Plan which was submitted by the School wherein the discipline Camp and its funding formed part thereof. Further, the Department funded the Camp (as
  per the Business Plan).
• While we understand that the Business Plan is merely a plan of activities that the School wishes to undertake, and that the implementation thereof only comes into effect once it is approved,
  the relevant officials that signed and approved the Business Plan should have applied more scrutiny, especially when one considers the nature of the activities to be carried and its suitability for Learners
  with special educational needs. The nature of the activities for this discipline Camp involves forcing Learners to perform exercises, which constitutes corporal punishment and is prohibited in terms of
  section 10 of SASA.
• It is critical to assess and apply scrutiny when signing and/or approving business plans for Schools. The officials of the Department should ensure that when approving a business plan, regard must be given to the suitability and accreditation of third and/or external organisations and persons when they are so featured. They should also have regard to the nature of the activities that are budgeted for and should where necessary, require a detailed explanation of each activity and what it entails on the Business Plan.
• It is quite apparent, based on our discussions with the School, that the Learners from the School have behavioural challenges which require the intervention of the Department. While we understand that the Department may not be aware of concerns that Schools are facing if those concerns are not directly reported on by the School, it is very important for the Department to be more visible to Schools and ensure that visits are made to Schools more often than necessary to do so. When the investigators spoke to the Principal of the School, she expressed that the District was not responsive and/or visible to the School. The officials from the District admitted that only Schools that need urgent support are prioritised. This, however, raises concerns as all Schools require attention and equal support from the Department, including interventions, where there is a need. Visiting Schools more often and having discussions with the School regarding problems that they are facing may enlighten the Schools on the support and interventions that the Department may offer. We
  heard from the District Officials that there may be staffing issues as 1 (one) IDSO is allocated 20 (twenty) Schools. It may be necessary for the Department to look into these kinds of issues and find
  appropriate solutions.
  The role of the SGB, if any
• Generally, the SGB is tasked to: –
  To keep a watchful eye on the general welfare of the School and advise the Principal on the drafting of School policy;
  To promote and protect interests of the School;
  To see to infrastructure repairs;
  To advise the School on extra mural activities and participate in organising them;
  To make recommendations to the HOD on staffing;
  To ensure safety of the Learners;
  To ensure policy is adhered to and properly communicated; and
  To ensure that Learners are protected and there is peace around the School.
• In the current situation, the SGB is not functional because it is not performing any of the above functions. Also, the SGB was not involved in the planning of the trip.
• Regulation 9 (of the Tour Regulations) imposes obligations on the SGB to appoint an educator at the School as tour manager to take overall responsibility for any tour by Learners of the School. The SGB
  must ensure that at least one educator accompanies every 20 (twenty) Learners or part thereof on any tour and in the case of a tour where both male and female Learners are participants, at least one
  male educator accompanies every 20 (twenty) male Learners and at least one female educator accompanies every 20 (twenty) female Learners of part thereof. We have also noted that the 2 (two) memos either identified by or shared with us which were to remind the Principal and Schools of the Tour Regulations, were also marked for Chairpersons of SGB’s attention.
• The SGB did not ensure that there were educators to supervise the Learners at the discipline Camp in accordance with Regulation 9. The SGB further did not ensure that the Camp site was suitable for
  the Learners (as they are trained in workshops to do so). Whether counselling was provided or not and whether it is necessary to provide it now
• Based on discussions with everyone who is affected by the tragedy, it is apparent that adequate counselling was not provided. It may be appropriate for the Department to consider engaging relevant professionals to assist in this regard.
  Having Investigated The Matter, The Law Firm Made The Following Recommendations:
• That the Departmental and/or District or Schools must have accredited service providers who have gone through proper procurement processes and have been verified to possess the necessary skills, qualifications and have capabilities and abilities to provide the required services.
• That the schools must have adequate insurance cover and ensure that the insurance remains valid at all times.
• That Daveyton Skills School must have a fully functional SGB.
• That Daveyton Skills School must be trained on Departmental policy and Regulations on a regular basis;
• That there must be constant interaction and information sharing between the School and the District Office.
• That Harmonisation between the Tour Regulations and Safety Regulations in respect of the personnel required to accompany Learners on tours and the educator-learner ratio.
• That the Safety Regulations and Tour Regulations be stringent and impose responsibilities on the School to make arrangements for pretrip inspections prior to tours being undertaken.
• That the definition of ‘tour’ in the Tour Regulations is limited and does not include any activity that falls outside education and sports. The law firm suggest that the definition be expanded to include other activities that are geared at learner development.
• That more scrutiny should be applied by the District when approving business plans and that Supporting documents should be attached to business plans.
• Now that the Department is aware of what is happening with the School, it is suggested that they [the department] should assist the School.
• That the Department should report Rising Stars to the Department of Social Development.
• That the Department should provide psychological support to all relevant stakeholders, including the School, the affected families and the Learners.
• That the Department should develop language policy aimed at improving communication channels between schools and parents of learners. Such communication should include all official languages,
  where possible.