Why the conception of free higher education in South Africa is misplaced
One of the narratives that has fuelled continuing protests at South Africa's universities is that students have been promised the right to free higher education.
Threads of this narrative go back to the Freedom Charter, the pernyataan of principles that guided the struggle for the liberation of South Africa. Others poin to the country's constitution and say that it contains a commitment to this promise. And still others poin to a decision taken by the ruling African National Congress a decade ago that promised this outcome.
But how much of this is true?
The charter and the constitution are carefully crafted. They do not specifically make reference to "free higher education" - a notion that has set both students and South African society down a cul de sac. It is this idea that has framed the continuing protests at our universities under the spanduk: "Free higher education in our lifetime".
But the terms of the provision of education are different compared with the other socio-economic rights. The constitution premises the feasibility of delivering the other rights on the availability of sumber. The right to education doesn't explicitly have this as a condition. Instead, the constitution provides that it should take place gradually.
The government has tried to make this poin, but the university students are not having any of it. They continue to permintaan free higher education now.
But, why would they theme their protest around this notion when the constitution talks about the right to education, not free education? Perhaps the answer is that reading the constitution this way is tantamount to reductionism - the implication that the right to education necessarily means free education.
Noble cause
The students' cause is noble. It tests the usefulness of the socioeconomic rights enshrined in the constitution, specifically the right to education. But what does free higher education actually mean?
