Teacher found guilty of school beating

A 16-year-old boy made legal history in the High Court this week by becoming the first Namibian school pupil known to have successfully sued a teacher for having been beaten at school.

In a judgement that was handed down on Wednesday, Acting Judge Raymond Heathcote ordered teacher Aaron Tjatindi and the Minister of Education to pay N$35 000 to a former pupil of Windhoek’s Olof Palme Primary School, Kapurunje Uirab, as compensation for a beating that Uirab claimed to have received from Tjatindi almost two years ago. The Acting Judge ruled that all the probabilities in the case overwhelmingly pointed towards a finding that Tjatindi had given Uirab a beating at the school in connection with a report that had been made to the teacher that Uirab was being accused of having stolen a cellphone that belonged to a fellow pupil.Having made this finding, Acting Judge Heathcote ordered Tjatindi and the Minister to pay N$35 000 in damages to Uirab, and also to pay the costs of his counsel, Susan Vivier, who had represented him on instructions from the Legal Assistance Centre.Uirab is, as far as could be established, the first school student in Namibia to have taken legal action against a teacher based on claims that he had received a beating at school.Corporal punishment has been outlawed in Namibia’s schools since the Supreme Court ruled in 2001 that the Constitution’s guarantee of human rights and its protection of human dignity would prohibit State organs from implementing this form of physical punishment.Tjatindi vehemently denied having beaten Uirab when he testified before Acting Judge Heathcote during the hearing of the civil claim that Uirab had lodged against the teacher and the Minister.In his judgement on Wednesday, the Acting Judge however dismissed Tjatindi’s denials, and, describing the teacher as having come across as “a cunning witness” in court, stated that he had found Tjatindi’s explanations to the court totally unconvincing.Uirab, and also his mother, did not escape some criticism in the judgement either.The Acting Judge commented that in his opinion Uirab, probably spurred on by his mother, Rita Uiras, had tried during his testimony in court to increase the severity to the beatings that he received.His testimony on a whole could however not be rejected or described as unsatisfactory, the Acting Judge said.Uirab had told the court that Tjatindi on October 23 2003 questioned him and another boy about a report that they had been involved in the disappearance of a cellphone from the school bag of a girl who was attending Olof Palme Primary School with them.They denied having taken the phone, and then Tjatindi started assaulting them, Uirab claimed.He told the court that the teacher first slapped them in the face, and then gave them a beating with a piece of plastic pipe that had a wire inserted inside.In order to stop the beating, Uirab said, they eventually told the teacher that they would be bringing the cellphone back to school the next day.When they did not bring the phone the next day, though, Tjatindi gave them another beating with the pipe, Uirab testified.The purpose of the beating, Acting Judge Heathcote commented in his judgement, was not to administer punishment but to force the boys to admit the theft.It had the brutal effect and purpose of assaulting someone until he admitted theft, he said.The amount of money that he was awarding to Uirab as damages had to show that the courts are serious about what is in the Constitution and about what the country’s courts have laid down in the past, the Acting Judge said.The Acting Judge ruled that all the probabilities in the case overwhelmingly pointed towards a finding that Tjatindi had given Uirab a beating at the school in connection with a report that had been made to the teacher that Uirab was being accused of having stolen a cellphone that belonged to a fellow pupil.Having made this finding, Acting Judge Heathcote ordered Tjatindi and the Minister to pay N$35 000 in damages to Uirab, and also to pay the costs of his counsel, Susan Vivier, who had represented him on instructions from the Legal Assistance Centre.Uirab is, as far as could be established, the first school student in Namibia to have taken legal action against a teacher based on claims that he had received a beating at school.Corporal punishment has been outlawed in Namibia’s schools since the Supreme Court ruled in 2001 that the Constitution’s guarantee of human rights and its protection of human dignity would prohibit State organs from implementing this form of physical punishment.Tjatindi vehemently denied having beaten Uirab when he testified before Acting Judge Heathcote during the hearing of the civil claim that Uirab had lodged against the teacher and the Minister.In his judgement on Wednesday, the Acting Judge however dismissed Tjatindi’s denials, and, describing the teacher as having come across as “a cunning witness” in court, stated that he had found Tjatindi’s explanations to the court totally unconvincing.Uirab, and also his mother, did not escape some criticism in the judgement either.The Acting Judge commented that in his opinion Uirab, probably spurred on by his mother, Rita Uiras, had tried during his testimony in court to increase the severity to the beatings that he received.His testimony on a whole could however not be rejected or described as unsatisfactory, the Acting Judge said.Uirab had told the court that Tjatindi on October 23 2003 questioned him and another boy about a report that they had been involved in the disappearance of a cellphone from the school bag of a girl who was attending Olof Palme Primary School with them.They denied having taken the phone, and then Tjatindi started assaulting them, Uirab claimed.He told the court that the teacher first slapped them in the face, and then gave them a beating with a piece of plastic pipe that had a wire inserted inside.In order to stop the beating, Uirab said, they eventually told the teacher that they would be bringing the cellphone back to school the next day.When they did not bring the phone the next day, though, Tjatindi gave them another beating with the pipe, Uirab testified.The purpose of the beating, Acting Judge Heathcote commented in his judgement, was not to administer punishment but to force the boys to admit the theft.It had the brutal effect and purpose of assaulting someone until he admitted theft, he said.The amount of money that he was awarding to Uirab as damages had to show that the courts are serious about what is in the Constitution and about what the country’s courts have laid down in the past, the Acting Judge said.