South Africa’s legal battle over matric results publication highlights the complex balance between data privacy rights and equitable access to public information. Picture Credit: Notory Services
By Aisha Zardad
South Africa – A simmering legal standoff over the publication of South Africa’s matriculation results has escalated into a full-blown constitutional and public policy battle, now headed to the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA). At the heart of the dispute is a clash between privacy rights under the Protection of Personal Information Act (POPIA) and the long-standing tradition of making matric results broadly accessible to the public.
In November 2024, the Information Regulator, chaired by Advocate Pansy Tlakula, issued a formal enforcement notice to the Department of Basic Education (DBE), instructing it to stop publishing matric results in newspapers. The Regulator argued that even when results are printed with only examination numbers and not learners’ names, this still constitutes the processing of personal data under POPIA unless consent is obtained from learners or their guardians. The directive also required the department to adopt POPIA-compliant alternatives, such as school-based releases or secure SMS notifications.
The department did not comply, and the Regulator imposed a R5 million administrative fine, asserting that publishing results without consent violated learners’ privacy rights. The DBE, however, pushed back, arguing that using unique exam numbers does not infringe on personal information, as the public cannot reasonably identify an individual based on that number alone. This approach, the department said, was particularly important for learners in remote or under-resourced areas who may lack access to online portals or school facilities.
In December 2025, a full bench of the Gauteng High Court sided with the DBE, ruling that the use of exam numbers sufficiently protects privacy while serving the public interest. The court noted that concerns about learners identifying each other from exam numbers were unrealistic, and that anonymised publication ensures equitable access to results without violating POPIA. The Information Regulator, dissatisfied with the outcome, has filed for leave to appeal to the SCA, arguing that the High Court misapplied the law and failed to uphold the constitutional protections afforded by POPIA. The Regulator has also sought to suspend the High Court order pending the appeal, keeping the original enforcement notice in effect for the time being.
This case highlights a broader debate in South Africa between privacy and transparency. Advocates for anonymised publication argue it balances access and protection, enabling learners nationwide to view results without revealing personal details. Privacy supporters, however, stress that even anonymised data can be misused and that strict adherence to POPIA is necessary to protect young learners’ information. Civil society organisations, such as AfriForum, have supported the DBE, pointing out that matric results are critical public information, especially for disadvantaged learners, and should remain accessible.
As the matter moves to the Supreme Court of Appeal, the outcome could reshape how government departments handle sensitive public data, potentially setting a precedent for balancing transparency with privacy in South Africa’s education system.
