The longstanding legal battle over the publication of matric results in newspapers is back in court next week, with the Information Regulator asking for leave to appeal against an earlier judgment allowing for publication.
Image: Armand Hough / Independent Newspapers
The question of whether it should be permissible to publish the matric results in newspapers and on online platforms will once again come under legal scrutiny next week in the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria.
The Department of Basic Education (DBE) will seek leave to appeal an earlier order that gave the green light to the yearly publication of results. The matter is due to be heard virtually on March 12.
This has been an ongoing legal issue since 2022, and while several judges have, up to now, given the go-ahead for the publication, the Information Regulator (IR) remains concerned that publication contravenes the Protection of Personal Information Act (POPIA).
In 2022, the DBE tried to prohibit publication, but the judge agreed with AfriForum and the other parties involved 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.
At the end of the following year, the IR tried to prevent the DBE from publishing the 2024 matric results. However, the IR’s application for an interdict failed when the court ruled in favour of publishing the results.
POPIA came under the spotlight, as the IR maintained that publishing the results alongside the matric candidate’s exam number is in contravention of POPIA. The IR issued the DBE with a notice that it may no longer publish the matric exam results, as it is in violation of the Act.
When the department went ahead with publishing the results, it was slapped with a R5 million fine. The IR felt that learners could get their results from their schools or be notified via SMSes.
According to the IR, matriculants over 18 must give consent before their results are published, and the parents or caregivers of those under 18 must give consent.
When the matter landed in court again last year, the department said the published information does not constitute personal information for purposes of the Act. It argued that no reader of a newspaper will be able to identify the learners by their exam numbers.
The IR argued that a learner sitting next to another in an examination room can peek at the other’s examination number and thus know what that person’s results are.
But Judge Omphemetse Mooki, who wrote the judgment in December, agreed with the department that this contention was "fanciful".
He questioned which learner, busy writing exams, would bother doing this. He commented further that the Act is concerned with preserving privacy interests. He held that the manner in which the results are published does not infringe upon these rights.
While in light of this judgment, the DBE went ahead in publishing the 2025 results this year, the IR issued court papers asking for leave to appeal the judgment. Should they receive this approval, the IR will take the matter to the Supreme Court of Appeal, as well as any other related issues.
The IR maintains that the publishing of the results contravenes POPIA. It said that the matter should be further ventilated by another court, as, according to the IR, the High Court, in its judgment, did not adequately deal with the definitions of POPIA. The IR's stance is that future certainty on the matter must be obtained.