The case, which will start on 15 May will be heard by the Johannesburg High Court. The outcome will have severe implications for any state school that promotes one religion – in dress code, prayers or readings – even if the religion reflects the belief system of the majority.

The schools taken to court by the Organisasie Vir Godsdienste Onderrig en Demokrasie (OGOD) are Laerskool Randhart, Laerskool Baanbreker, Laerskool Garsfontein, Hoerskool Linden – all in Gauteng – and two Oudtshoorn schools: Hoerskool Oudtshoorn and Lagenhoven Gimnasium.

OGOD was founded in 2008 by Hans Pietersen who found out his children were being exposed to Christian thinking, prayers and songs at the school they attended. He wants to  “eradicate religious indoctrination through public schools, to identify and expose magical thinking and to promote a democratic, secular and human rights-based society”.

Meanwhile trade union Solidarity announced this morning that they will apply to become a friend of the court (amicus curiae). According to Johan Kruger, Deputy Executive Officer at Solidarity, it is very important for Solidarity that public schools should have the freedom to choose a Christian character. “This premise of faith is Constitutionally possible, practically feasible and plays an important role in the success of various schools across the country,” Kruger said.

Kruger explains that, it was not necessary for Solidarity to initially act as friend of the court in this matter because the South African Teachers’ Union (SAOU), on 10 March 2016 as friend of the court, strongly endorsed schools’ rights to align with a particular faith. “The SAOU however, submitted court documents on 28 February this year which is in direct opposition with their initial declaration of oath, and which strongly oppose the strong pro-religious premise of their members and member schools,” Kruger explained.

“The SAOU’s turnaround left Solidarity with no choice but to act on the matter,” Kruger confirmed.

In the meantime, the SAOU has changed their strategy on April 21 by withdrawing from the case. “Unfortunately there is already a void in the court documents. Thousands of teachers who strongly believe that schools can maintain a specific ethos’s voices are still not heard. Solidarity will thus continue to act as a friend of the court, otherwise the unique voice of those vocation-driven teachers will not be heard,” Kruger said.

The education and justice ministers, both respondents in the case, said they would not oppose the matter and would abide by the court’s decision but the Education Department indicated in court papers that it would defend its religion policy as being in line with the constitution.

Cause for Justice, an NGO, admitted as a friend of the court, last year told The Times: “Each school is a separate legal entity governed on democratic principles and may determine its own character, identity or ethos. There is nothing in our constitution, Schools Act or the National Policy on Religion and Education that precludes a school from having a religious character or any other ideological identity.”

It warned that if Pietersen and his supporters were successful “our religious rights could be swept away.”