There is nothing that says the state must work towards the “progressive realisation” of the right to a basic education, or that the realisation of the right to a basic education is “sub- ject to available resources”. There are only two socioeconomic rights in the entire Constitution that are not sub- ject to such limitations and progres- sive realisation, and these are: the right to a basic education and chil- dren’s core socioeconomic rights to “basic nutrition, shelter, basic health care services and  social  services” in terms of section 28(1)(c) of the Constitution.
There is rationality in not subject-
ing these rights to limitations and progressive realisation. In their wis- dom, the drafters of the Constitution recognised that in addition to other  
necessary  measures  of  redress,  it
was only through the systematic prioritisation of the next generation that South Africa would be able to transcend the multifaceted and far- reaching consequences of apartheid.
When the South African Constitution was being written, it was expressly noted and understood that education would hold a privi- leged place in the new democratic dispensation. Neither redress nor prosperity would be possible with- out it. The Constitution’s mandate to “free the potential of each person” was contingent on  the  realisation of this right for all who live in the country.
As  constitutional  court  Justice
Bess Nkabinde ruled in Governing Body of the Juma Musjid Primary School v Essay: ‘‘The significance of education, in particular basic edu- cation, for individual and societal development in our democratic dis- pensation in the light of the legacy of apartheid, cannot be overlooked
… [B]asic education is an important socioeconomic right directed, among other things, at promoting and devel- oping a child’s personality, talents and mental and physical abilities to his or her fullest potential. Basic edu- cation also provides a foundation for a child’s lifetime learning and work opportunities.”
While the unqualified right to a basic education has not been legally contested, it is still not entirely clear what is (and is not) included when one speaks about a “basic education”. The Constitution itself does not provide an explication of this right which specifies how it is to be real- ised and what conditions would need to be met for this right to be said to have been realised or not.
One of the minimum “core” outcomes with respect to the right to a basic education, is that a child must be able to read and write with under- standing at a basic level by the age of
10. Put differently, this fundamental skill is one of the tools by means of which the constitutional promise is to be fulfilled. Unless and until the child is educated to the requisite minimum level, the constitutional promise remains unfulfilled.
What the education space needs is a clearly articulated, evidence- based, and  measurable  definition of what it means to “read and write, with understanding, at a basic level”. Although it is clear that the right to a basic education envisaged in the Constitution goes well beyond merely the ability to read and write, it is equally clear that if a child is denied this most basic skill (to read and write with understanding) they have at the same time, also been denied the right to a basic education.

To this end, the South African Human Rights Commission launched a Right to Read and Write Campaign in September last year. This campaign speaks to the speci- fication of minimum outcomes that must be met and the minimum set of knowledge, skills and dispositions that a child must possess by age 10 for the ability to read and write, as a central component of the right to a basic education, to be said to have been realised.

This opinion piece contains extracts from a position paper developed by the South African Human Rights Commission in collaboration with experts in the fields of law, educa- tion, economics, disability and literacy.
Advocate André Gaum is a full-time commissioner of the South African Human Rights Commission respon- sible for basic education
 
Source: Mail & Guardian