Parliament and The Hague: that’s what two Victoria Girls’ High School (VGHS) pupils have their sights set on, after experiencing the Constitutional Court during the National Schools Moot Court Competition (NSMCC). Lusanele Kesa (Grade 10) and Mairi van School (Grade 11) were semifinalists in the 13th edition of the competition, hosted by the University of Pretoria with the finals held in the highest court of the land. The team of two received 91% from the adjudicators in their semifinal. The joint winners of the competition were Ndabankulu High School, from Mthatha, and Hoërskool Vanderbijlpark, from Gauteng. Runners up were Thaba Chweu Boarding School and Kimberley Technical High School.
The South African Human Rights Commission and the Departments of Basic Education and Justice and Constitutional Development hosted the preliminary oral rounds of the 13th Annual South African National Schools Moot Court Programme at the University of Pretoria on September 26 and 27. The finals took place at the Constitution Hill Precinct in Braamfontein on September 29.
The South African Schools Moot is a competition open to Grade 10 and 11 pupils. It aims to create greater awareness in schools and communities in South Africa about the Constitution and the values it embodies through active participation. The aim is also to encourage talented young people to consider pursuing a law career.
Each team of two had to prepare arguments for and against (in court terms, applicants and respondents) the hypothetical case, which centred on access to technology in schools. Learners at a disadvantaged school, represented by an NGO called Education for All, argued that the lack of technology that better resourced schools had – such as computer labs, laptops and wifi – violated the right to education. They argued that unequal access to technology between public schools violated the learners’ rights to equality and protection from unfair discrimination.
For the respondent (Department of Basic Education and provincial Department of Education), the teams argued that the lack of access to technology did not violate the right to education in section 29 of the Constitution; that the right to basic education in section 29(1)(a) extended to Grade 9 only; and that the lack of access to technology did not constitute unfair discrimination, as socio-economic status and/or poverty were not listed grounds in section 9 of the Constitution.
The competitors’ brief explains that the High Court and Supreme Court found in favour of the DBE and DOE and so the matter was taken on appeal to the Constitutional Court.
Different from debating
Both girls are on the VGHS debating team and are well versed in the school debating standards of motions, points of information, and taking on the roles of proponent or opponent.
But, “It was much more different from debating than I expected it to be,” Mairi said. “Because when you’re there speaking, it’s not really a speech – it’s more of a conversation.”
The justices’ role was different from that of debate adjudicators.
“It’s a bit scary because it’s these learned professionals who are now asking you questions about things that they know about. But it’s also comforting to know that you know your facts and you have backed up your argument.”
Lusanele said, “It was great being exposed to the law and that kind of environment because I was considering going into law as a career and I got to see what I’d be getting myself into.
“But it was also really stressful. We were working really hard into the depths of the night. That was not pleasant, but it definitely worked out well for us because our reworked arguments got us into the seminfinals.”
Mairi elaborated.
“We has these coaches and we’d gone to a boot camp the week before. At the competition, we had a roster where we’d each get an hour of the night when we’d run through our arguments, rework them and rewrite them. On our first night, we were last on the roster. Our coaches came in at 1am, stayed until about 2am and then we rewrote our argument till about 2.30am.
“Then we woke up at 6 to go to the university and had to go through our arguments again there.”
Different cultures
For Lusanele, it was a bit overwhelming at the start.
“It was my first time on stage and there are so many people. I knew four of the teams from the boot camp; but there were so many students in the competition that they filled up the whole hotel. I was ‘Oh my gosh – so many people!’”
“It took me a while to get into social groups, but when I did, it was really refreshing to interact with different people and different cultures in South Africa. You think that here in the Eastern Cape you’ve got a wide range of people, but really this isn’t even the tip of the iceberg. That, I think, was the most exciting part for me.”
The competition was a mixture of good and bad, Lusanele said.
“It was really nice being exposed to the law and that kind of environment, but it was also really stressful. Working really hard into the depths of the night was not pleasant, but it definitely worked out well for us because our reworked arguments got us where where did in the competition.”
“The justice who spoke told us that many lawyers never get to see the inside of the Constitutional Court. So it was really special that we got to see that before we (hopefully) go into our careers as lawyers,” Mairi said.
The programme gives the pupils an opportunity to develop their skills in public speaking, research, writing, structuring a legal argument and analysing cases. The adjudicators included Constitutional Court Judges, Supreme Court of Appeal Judges, Judges from other divisions, Magistrates and legal practitioners.
Power of legal principles
Are Mairi and Lusanele destined for the Bar – maybe even The Hague one day?
“If I did decide to go into law I think this would have been a huge part of it; if I don’t, it will be because something else has called me at that moment,” said Lusanele, who has her sights set on international law.
“I like making small differences, but I do want to make a bigger difference,” she said. “I want to be somewhere where I’m fighting with the people at the top of the food chain in the world and making the world a better place for everyone, rather than just one or two people.”
Mairi is really interested in the power of law and legal principles to shape policy.
“I’d love to use law to go into parliament or anywhere in government really. Either defending [groups] as a lawyer, or as somebody in politics in general.
“The idea of criminal law does stress me out a bit. At the competition, we would argue and then realise, ‘Oh we should have said that, we should have said this’. But you can’t really go in and defend someone’s life, and then go afterwards, ‘Oh I should have said this, I should have said that’.
“I think that’s a bit too high-pressured for me. Also, I find governance very interesting.”
Teacher in charge of debating, Sandy Vlandir, is very proud of the pair.
“They achieved 91% in the semifinal, which is really good,” she said.
- This article was first published in Talk of the Town, October 17, 2024. The newspaper serving the communities of Ndlambe and the Sunshine Coast, with a weekly wrap of Makhanda news, is available at stores from early on Thursdays.
