The judge added that the expression "personally identifiable information" goes no further than a description of essential facts in the dispute between the parties.
Image: File
The Gauteng High Court on Wednesday refused an application by the Information Regulator (IR) for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal against an order issued in December, in which three judges gave the go-ahead for the publication of the results in newspapers and online.
Judge Omphemetse Mooki, supported by two more judges, concluded that the IR does not have any prospects of succeeding with its appeal if they were given the greenlight to take it further. The IR can, however, now petition the SCA directly for leave to appeal.
It was made clear in the December order, as well as three previous orders, that the results may only be published using the pupils' exam numbers.
The IR, however, maintains that this is still in contravention of the Protection of Personal Information Act (Popia). It is of the opinion that the SCA should take another look at the Act and its implications regarding the publication of the results in newspapers.
But as things stand now, following this latest judgment, the results may be published.
Alana Bailey, AfriForum’s Head of Cultural Affairs, meanwhile said it was a relief that the dispute had now finally been resolved.
“This is a victory for the disclosure of information that is in the public interest,” she said.
AfriForum was one of the parties in the dispute.
The case began in 2022 when the Department of Basic Education (DBE) tried to prohibit the publication of the results. In legal action that followed, the court ruled in favour of AfriForum and the other parties, which include the Department of Basic Education, that it was in the public interest and should therefore proceed.
At the end of 2024, the IR tried to prevent the DBE from publishing the 2024 matric results. However, the IR’s application to obtain an interdict against this failed, after which the case on the merits followed.
In December last year, the full bench of judges ruled that matric results may indeed be published on public platforms. In addition, it was found that the use of examination numbers as the only means of identification provides sufficient protection for the privacy of matriculants and that the DBE acted lawfully by not complying with the IR’s instruction to withhold the results.
Bailey explained that the outcome of the case affected more issues than just the publication of matric results.
“Several research fields work with information of individuals who can only be identified by numbers or codes. This is used to protect their right to privacy and anonymity. The fact that the case has now been concluded means that such data can be used and vital research can continue without fear of being interrupted."
In the application for leave to appeal, the IR questioned, among other things, the court’s jurisdiction to condone the disregard of statutory instructions such as those of the regulator to the DBE. In contrast, the legal teams of AfriForum and the DBE emphasised the court’s jurisdiction and reaffirmed the protection that examination numbers offer learners’ right to privacy.
Judge Mooki, who penned Wednesday’s refusal for leave to appeal, said: "I am not persuaded that the expression 'personally identifiable information' offends against the Popia, or that it constitutes legislation by a court".
The judge added that the expression "personally identifiable information" goes no further than a description of essential facts in the dispute between the parties.
“I am also not persuaded that the application raises compelling reasons that warrant granting leave to appeal,” he concluded.