Hindu student's sacred thread cut off in a school in South Africa

Case ID : f664608 | Location : KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa | Date of Incident : Mon, 3 February, 2025

Case ID : f664608

KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa

3 February, 2025

Hindu student's sacred thread cut off in a school in South Africa

Restriction/ban on Hindu practices

Restriction on expression of Hindu identity

Attack not resulting in death

Attacked for Hindu identity

Case Summary

In South Africa, a teacher cut off the sacred thread from the wrist of a Hindu student in a school named Drakensburg Secondary School in the Kwazulu-Natal province. The teacher claimed that the school does not allow the wearing of cultural or religious symbols. South African Hindu Mahasabha (SAHM) condemned this action and called this action as insensitive. SAHM demanded action from the school authorities against the teacher. The SAHM stated: "The SAHM strongly condemns the insensitive and irresponsible action of an educator cutting off a religious string from a Hindu learner." SAHM President Ashwin Trikamjee said that the school authorities refused to take any responsibility on this issue. Muzi Mahlambi, a spokesperson for the Kwazulu-Natal Department of Education, said that the Constitution is the highest law, and any school policy that goes against it is unacceptable. He stated: “No student should be punished for their religious beliefs.”

Why it is Hate Crime ?

This has been added as a religiously motivated hate crime under two prime categories of the tracker. The first is- Attack not resulting in death. Under this, the sub-category selected is- Attacked for Hindu identity. In several cases, Hindus are attacked merely for their Hindu identity without any perceived provocation. A classic example of this category of religiously motivated hate crime is a murder in 2016. 7 ISIS terrorists were convicted for shooting a school principal in Kanpur because they got ‘triggered’ seeing the Kalava on his wrist and tilak that he had put. In this, the Hindu victim had offered no provocation except for his Hindu religious identity. The motivation for the murder was purely religious, driven by religious supremacy. Such cases where Hindus are targeted merely for their religious identity would be documented as a hate crime under this category. The second category selected here is- Restriction/ban on Hindu practices. Under this, the sub-category selected is- Restriction on expression of Hindu identity. An example of the state-affected prejudicial and targeted orders against the Hindu community would be a government denying the right of a Hindu or a group of Hindus to hold a religious procession owing to the animosity of non-Hindu groups. Denial of the religious right of the Hindus to assuage the non-Hindu group which harbours animosity to a point where it could lead to violence against Hindus is not only a failure of law and order but is a prejudicial order against Hindus, denying them their fundamental rights to express their religious identity. An example of a hate crime against Hindus by a non-Hindu would be a non-Hindu institution forcing its Hindu employees to abandon religious symbols that a Hindu would wear as an expression of faith owing to inherent prejudice against the faith professed by the victim or a non-Hindu group of people restricting a Hindu group from constructing a place of worship simply because the demography of the area in which the temple is being built is dominated by non-Hindus. Such actions are driven by religious animosity and/or prejudice against Hindus and their faith and would therefore be categorised as a hate crime. In this case, the teacher of a school in South Africa prohibited a Hindu student from wearing their religious identity to school. In Hinduism, religious symbols like a sacred thread or Kalawa and tilak hold deep religious, cultural, and spiritual significance. It symbolises protection, blessings, unity, and commitment to spiritual and ethical principles. Its use across various rituals and ceremonies underscores its importance in the Hindu way of life. This act of not allowing students to wear their religious symbols disrupts the students' ability to freely practice and express their religious beliefs. Such acts are often seen as attempts to assert dominance or express hostility towards Hinduism. Further, every individual has the right to practice their religious faith and restricting someone from doing that can also be considered a prejudicial order denying the Hindu community its fundamental rights. Such arbitrary actions taken against Hindus are prejudicial to the rights of Hindus and stem from animosity and prejudice against Hindu beliefs, which is why this case is being categorised as a religiously motivated hate crime. It is also important to note that the accused, who was a teacher in this case, subtly tried to influence the impressionable minds of the Hindu child trying to alienate him from their own religion by forbidding him to wear Hindu religious symbols like the sacred thread or the Kalawa. The victim here was a minor, which essentially means that the element of consent and genuine change of conscience was missing ab initio. It is a well-established fact that children are more susceptible to manipulation since they are still developing emotionally, cognitively, and socially. Their brains are not fully matured, making them more vulnerable to influence and less capable of critically evaluating information. Moreover, subtle manipulation tactics can be difficult to detect, especially when they are employed by trusted authority figures in positions of influence. This makes it challenging for parents, to identify and address instances of religious manipulation in schools. Since the underlying offence, in this case, is against a child of a specific faith and involves subtle tactics of indoctrination, which obviously stems from a bias against the Hindu faith, this case has been documented as a hate crime under the above categories.