How did the tragic case of a four-year-old girl in Eldorado Park expose failures in protecting a child?

The tragic case involving the murder and sexual assault of a four-year-old girl from Eldorado Park at the hands of her father has once again cast a harsh light on South Africa’s failing child protection system.

The charge sheet against the accused includes murder, attempted murder, rape, child abuse, and assault with intent to cause grievous bodily harm (GBH).

According to court documents, on 6 August the accused allegedly assaulted the child, causing severe bruising, and is further alleged to have sexually penetrated her.

Police were called to the property the same day after a complaint of physical abuse. When officers arrived, they were directed to a backyard shack where they found a man with a young boy and a girl.

Upon entering the bedroom, police noticed that the girl, who was lying on a bed, had visible head injuries, bruises, and a swollen eye. The man, who identified himself as the children’s father, could not provide a clear explanation of what had happened and was subsequently arrested.

The child was rushed to a nearby medical facility but later died from her injuries.The mother has also been charged with defeating the ends of justice.

Community members and family claim she (the mother) was informed about the abuse on several occasions but failed to act, and when she did, she allegedly previously withdrew an abuse case against the accused.

On whether the state and the child’s mother also bear responsibility. Dr. Shahieda Omar, Clinical Director at The Teddy Bear Foundation, said,

“The mother would also have to be held responsible for what has happened because when one parent becomes or remains complacent, that parent is complicit in the abuse. They become colluders because no action has been taken to protect a child who is vulnerable, defenseless, powerless, and cannot stop or prevent the abuse from occurring.

“The mother, being an adult, a significant other, and fully aware that the child is not in a position to stop this from occurring, should have realized that action had to be taken.

“Failure to take action according to the Children’s Act and the Sexual Offences Act constitutes a criminal offence. The father, having a past history of child abuse allegations, should have warranted stronger monitoring and evaluation by child protection organisations.

“The kind of monitoring required would include home visits to ensure the child was not at risk, that home circumstances were conducive to the child’s well-being, and that the best interests of the child were promoted. However, we cannot condemn child welfare without knowing exactly what transpired and what responsibilities were fulfilled.”

Dr. Omar emphasised the need for a collective societal approach to preventing abuse:

“If we look at urgent reforms or safeguards to prevent similar cases of child abuse in the future, it is important that we have a whole-of-society approach.

“Each and every person in the community whether family, educational institutions, creches, schools, recreational facilities, retailers, bazaar shops, taxi ranks, faith-based organisations, traditional leaders, medical practitioners, or healthcare facilities has a legal obligation to report if a child is not safe or is showing signs of abuse. This is not a moral obligation; it is a legal obligation.

“Often, individuals are afraid to report for fear of reprisal, living in communities where violence and gangsterism are rife. But it is crucial to understand that reports can be made anonymously to the Family Violence, Child Protection, and Sexual Offences Unit. Failure to report could result in the death of a vulnerable child.”

The Gauteng Department of Social Development however confirmed it had no prior knowledge of the family or the allegations of abuse until after the child’s death on 8 August.

On the withdrawal of abuse cases, the Department said,“The department conducts its own Safety Risk Assessment to determine the safety and vulnerability of children. The law enforcement arm will pursue the abuse charges but the department’s focus remains the child’s safety, care and best interests, which is of paramount importance as outlined in Section 9 of the Children’s Act 38 of 2005.”

It added that removing children from families is a last resort, even in situations involving substance abuse or prior abuse allegations.

Child protection advocates argue that this approach is failing children. Ilitha Labantu spokesperson Siya Monakali said, “The child’s continued presence in a dangerous environment despite prior warnings is not merely a personal tragedy, but a glaring example of systemic collapse.”

Monakali added that allegations of substance abuse, prior reports of violence, and the withdrawal of abuse complaints should have automatically triggered immediate intervention.

“The little girls life mattered. She deserved the protection of her family, her community, and her country. She was failed on all three counts.

“We cannot allow her death to be reduced to another statistic or another fleeting headline. This is a moment that demands we confront the uncomfortable truth: until we build a society where children are truly safe in their homes, we will continue to mourn lives that could and should have been saved.”

The accused will appear in the Protea Magistrates Court again on 18 August 2025.

[email protected]

Weekend Argus