Pretoria – After two days of hearings presided over by a full bench of judges in the High Court in Pretoria, judgment was reserved on the contentious matter of the publication of Matric results in newspapers.
The legal dispute over publishing South Africa’s National Senior Certificate (Matric) results in newspapers centers on balancing privacy rights under the Protection of Personal Information Act (POPIA) with public interest and accessibility.
RELATED: Dispute Over Publishing Matric Results In Newspapers Back In Court On Monday – The Bulrushes
The Information Regulator (IR), tasked with POPIA enforcement, views the publication of Matric results in newspapers as non-compliant.
In that regard, the Department of Basic Education’s non-compliance led to a R5 million fine and prompted the IR’s urgent interdict application in December 2024 to block the release of Matric results in newspapers.
However, on 8 January 2025, Judge Ronel Tolmay dismissed the IR’s application because she found that it did not meet the threshold of urgency.
She also noted the practice of publishing Matric results in newspapers had continued unchanged for three years after the matter was first challenged, and since then, there were no complaints registered about any breach of the privacy rights of learners.
Tolmay did not delve into the merits of the case, such as the strict application of POPIA, public interest, or press freedom on an urgent basis.
The judge opted for hearings as a non-urgent court matter.
As a result, the department proceeded to publish the 2024 results in newspapers on 9 January 2025, using anonymised exam numbers.
AfriForum and the other parties also participated in the legal action in support of the publication of Matric results in newspapers.
Commenting on the matter, Alana Bailey, AfriForum’s Head of Cultural Affairs, insisted that the publication of the results was in the public interest and that the use of examination numbers instead of the names of the matriculants provided sufficient protection for their privacy.
“Matriculants regularly request AfriForum to help ensure that they will still be able to get their results in the media as in the past,” Bailey said.
“We will protect their interests in this regard as far as possible.
“It is also important that more clarity is obtained about when individuals’ privacy must be protected at all costs, and when disclosure of information is deemed to be in the public interest.
“The ruling in this case will contribute to creating more certainty in this regard.”
This week, on Monday and Tuesday, the Pretoria High Court heard consolidated applications challenging the IR’s directives for future publications.
The department argues compliance with the 2022 order and POPIA via anonymisation, with no learner complaints.
The IR insists on consent and sequential number changes.
Judgment was reserved.
