SGB successful in stopping 'sex pest principal' returning to school

The school governing body (SGB) of prestigious Pietermaritzburg Merchiston Preparatory School has secured a court interdict to prevent the headmaster — who is accused of being a bully and a sex pest — from returning to the school.

This is pending an application to review and set aside the findings of a KwaZulu-Natal education department disciplinary inquiry which found Llewellyn Bragin not guilty of almost all charges against him, except for one that he has used the school account to fill up his personal vehicle.

The sanction was a final written warning.

Bragin was on suspension but after the ruling, this was uplifted by the department. But when he tried to return to school a group — apparently parents — blockaded the premises.

The SGB then launched urgent court proceedings in the Pietermaritzburg high court. While documents were being exchanged, the department agreed that Bragin would not go back to his duties but would work in the department’s local office.

Acting judge Rithi Singh, who heard argument in the SGB application on Friday, said the SGB had every right to bring the application in the interest of pupils and staff.

She said the pupils, aged between five and 13, were young and vulnerable. And the women complainants had expressed unease at Bragin’s return.

The SGB had shown it had good prospects of success in reviewing and overturning the disciplinary process and contrary to what the department had argued, women should be protected in the workplace and not told to go to the South African Council of Educators if they have a problem with sexual harassment at the school.

Many parents and staff members have been vehemently opposed to Bragin taking up the reins again. 

In essence, the SGB claims the disciplinary process was flawed. While it had received about 50 complaints from about 16 complainants — which it had passed on to the department —  Bragin had only faced 11 charges.

In his affidavit, SGB chairperson Paul Campbell detailed a litany of complaints from parents and staff members which ultimately led to the department suspending Bragin in September 2023.

He said the SGB could not support a principal who was the subject of serious allegations of financial mismanagement, accusations by female staff members of sexual harassment and inappropriate behaviour and “credible” accusations of assault, improper contact with, intimidation of and abusive conduct towards pupils, unless the accusations were found to be false in an “unimpeachable quasi judicial process”.

But in opposing the interdict, the department claimed Bragin was a “whistle-blower” who had lifted the lid on alleged financial irregularities at the school — which has been denied by the SGB.

KwaZulu-Natal education head Nkosinathi Ngcobo, in his affidavit, said the allegations against Bragin were broadly related to sexual harassment, workplace harassment, unprofessional conduct, financial mismanagement and complaints about bullying from three parents.

He said after the disciplinary hearing — at which the department had led the evidence of 10 witnesses and Bragin had called six, including himself — he had only been found guilty of one charge.

And there was thus no reason he should not return to his job.

But Campbell said the disciplinary findings were “unreasonable, irrational and “in some cases absurd”.

“The SGB concerns are the protection of extremely young and vulnerable children and the protection of female staff at the school.”

He noted the finding of not guilty on a charge of sexual harassment was put down to being “nothing more than paying a compliment”.

With regards to two alleged incidents in which Bragin is accused of bullying two young pupils with special needs, the chairperson found that “there is nothing wrong with the principal reprimanding the learner”.

Campbell said the two incidents showed that Bragin had an “uncontrolled temper”.

“There are multiple counts where he was charged with making comments, heavily laden with sexual innuendo towards female staff. To brush off all of this serious evidence with a finding that there is no rule against compliments is absurd,” he said.

TimesLIVE