William Shoki writes that a decision by a school in Sandton to discourage any discussion of Israeli-Palestinian violence is tantamount to encroachment on students' right to freedom of expression.
For three years, I was employed as a debating coach at Redhill High School (2017- 2020).
In most schools, debating is typically a lonely extra-curricular activity, both in terms of the students it attracts and its importance within the school's community.
At Redhill, I was struck by how debating, and all of the practices and values it nurtured - such as critical thinking, openness and a principled commitment to justice and fairness - was not only an activity the school took pride in, but something it also incorporated into ordinary school life.
It wasn't lost on me that Redhill has the capacity for all this, given its nature as a well-resourced private school. And like most private schools, Redhill also had to confront the legacy of apartheid and the fact that issues like racism and transformation lingered in its community.
Yet (from my vantage point at least), it appeared that Redhill maintained an earnest devotion to redress and, beyond this, towards making Redhill a school open to reckoning with past and present injustices.
So now, some years removed from my previous employment at the school, I was shocked to learn that the school is discouraging any discussion of Israeli-Palestinian violence. The school provides, as an explanation, the worry that such conversations are much too fraught for children, where "emotions tend to run high and assumptions tend to be made about people based on their religion and ethnic backgrounds".
Encroachment on freedom of expression
This move is equivalent to encroachment on students' right to freedom of expression. This is unconstitutional. If Redhill is worried about the possibility of bullying and harassment, the responsibility rests with it to manage and prevent this rather than prohibit discussion. It is not beyond the school to establish a forum for productive and civilised engagement on the matter, overseen and supervised by capable educators.
In the past I have spoken about Israel and Palestine to my debating students, many of whom had strong convictions on the subject, often conflicting with those of their fellow students. The discussions were by no means easy - but no productive discussions are - especially when they entail having to revise long and deeply held positions.
I would be more than happy to return to Redhill to facilitate such a discussion yet again (and at any other school for that matter). In any case, I think Redhill's student body is perfectly able, and in fact entitled, to discuss whatever topic as and when they see fit.
We must also be alive to how claims that certain situations are "complicated" operate as prohibitory of, rather than conducive to, discussion and engagement. Why, for example, does Redhill deem itself capable of discourse on complex topics like South Africa's apartheid past, but cannot provide for discussion on what is ongoing in Israel and Palestine? I, like Human Rights Watch, B'Tselem and countless other organisations, believe that the conditions Israel subjects Palestinians to constitutes apartheid.
Learners will undoubtedly have seen footage of the atrocities that have taken place over the past few weeks: settlers protected by Israeli state security forcibly removing Palestinians from homes in the Sheikh Jarrah neighbourhood in Jerusalem; the horrific scenes of Israeli security forces storming Al Aqsa mosque and firing rubber-coated steel bullets as thousands had gathered for prayers on the last Friday of Ramadan, injuring over 200 Palestinians; followed by the relentless bombing of Gaza.
They will also have seen footage of the many resistance types throughout Palestine that have followed these events. Surely a school such as Redhill is the best place to help learners think critically about current events and how they are portrayed in different media?
Therefore, one can only wonder why, amid a growing, evidence-based international consensus about the nature of Israel's settler-colonial oppression of the Palestinian people, a school like Redhill would shy away from the topic. But, this would not be the first time that students have come up against the established powers for daring to be critical of Israel.
In 2014, the then deputy head boy of King David Victory Park in Johannesburg was under fire for donning a Palestinian keffiyeh at the World Schools Debating Championships in solidarity with the Palestinians injured or killed during Israel's Operation Protective Edge (the student was representing the South African debating team at the international competition). In 2018, at Herzlia Middle School in Cape Town, two grade 9 students (one of them a debater), faced disciplinary action for taking the knee while the Israeli national anthem played during a school ceremony.
Why are schools afraid to let students freely express themselves on this issue?
Redhill's decision to restrict debate and discussion on one of the most egregious and ongoing abuses of human rights, disgracefully mirrors the frantic attempts by the apartheid government to censor and suppress speech after the 1976 Soweto uprising. At that time, as pressure against the apartheid state mounted, it was schools that were a crucial hotbed for dissent. As it was then, so it is now, unreasonably limiting freedom of speech undermines the very essence of constitutional democracy. I appeal to the executive head and management of Redhill School: let your students speak.
- William Shoki is a staff writer at Africa Is A Country, and is a member of the SA BDS Coalition and the Wits Palestine Solidarity Committee. He writes in his personal capacity.
To receive Opinions Weekly, sign up for the newsletter here. Now available to all News24 readers.
*Want to respond to the columnist? Send your letter or article to opinions@news24.com with your name and town or province. You are welcome to also send a profile picture. We encourage a diversity of voices and views in our readers' submissions and reserve the right not to publish any and all submissions received.
Disclaimer: News24 encourages freedom of speech and the expression of diverse views. The views of columnists published on News24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of News24.