The ongoing conflict at Soutpansberg Primary School in Louis Trichardt has taken another dramatic turn, with a recent High Court ruling that sets aside the appointment of the school's current principal, Ms Shonisani Mushaathama, and gives the acting Head of the Department (HOD) of Education and the MEC for Education in Limpopo 60 days to reconsider the appointment to the principal post.
The case was heard in the High Court in Polokwane, with judgment delivered by Acting Judge Bresler on 10 June. The applicant in the case was Soutpansberg Primary School's former acting principal, Mr Nyambeni Muravha. The HOD of Education was cited as the first respondent, with the MEC for Education, the School Governing Body (SGB) of Soutpansberg Primary, and Ms Mushaathama as the second, third, and fourth respondents respectively.
Judge Bresler ordered that the decision by the HOD of Education in Limpopo to refuse to appoint Muravha as principal be reviewed and set aside. The decision to appoint Mushaathama as principal was also reviewed and set aside. Thirdly, Judge Bresler ordered that the matter be referred back to the HOD of Education for reconsideration of the appointment to the principal post, with such decision to be made within 60 days of the date of the order. Lastly, the HOD of Education and the MEC were ordered to pay the costs of the application jointly and severally, the one paying the other to be absolved.
The 10 June High Court ruling follows months of a tense power struggle for control of the school between the current SGB and principal Mushaathama, who is backed by the Limpopo Department of Education.
The battle for control of the school reached a critical point in April this year, with the SGB and the Limpopo Department of Education coming to an impasse. The dispute, which dates back to 2021, centres on governance issues and allegations of mismanagement. The department claimed it had stripped the SGB of its powers, following an investigation into alleged irregularities, including financial mismanagement and dysfunctionality, and had appointed an interim structure to oversee the school. This action was reportedly taken after two parents' meetings in March this year had passed a motion of no confidence in the SGB, although the SGB disputes the legality of these meetings and maintains that due process was not followed in removing them from their role.
The SGB, however, insists it remains the school's duly elected governing body and argues that only the MEC for Education or the department's head can lawfully dissolve it — a process they say was never formally initiated or communicated. They also challenge the findings of the department's investigation, asserting that they were neither informed of nor involved in the process, and had requested official documentation to verify the parents' resolutions. The department, on the other hand, maintains that the SGB was aware of the investigation and that all necessary procedures were followed. The relationship between the SGB, the principal, and the department has become severely strained, with both sides accusing the other of non-cooperation and procedural irregularities. The SGB has sought legal representation and continues to contest the department's actions, leaving the school's governance in a state of uncertainty.
Following Judge Bresler's ruling, the Limpopo Department of Education was contacted for comment. The department was asked whether it would be appealing the court order and, if not, whether it would remove Ms Mushaathama. In response, provincial education department spokesperson Mr Mike Maringa said that the court order had accorded the accounting officer 60 days to consider the ruling and that the matter was currently with their legal division.