REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA COMBINED SECOND PERIODIC REPORT UNDER THE AFRICAN CHARTER ON HUMAN AND PEOPLE`S RIGHTS and INITIAL REPORT UNDER THE PROTOCOL TO THE AFRICAN CHARTER ON THE RIGHTS OF WOMEN IN AFRICA 162. In 2013, the vast majority (85,6%) of South Africans described their religious affiliation as ‘Christian’ while a further 5,6% said that they were not affiliated to any religion in particular. Five percent of individuals subscribed to religions that was described as, ‘ancestral, tribal, animist or other traditional African religions’. Muslims, who comprised 2% of the total, were predominantly found in Western Cape, KwaZulu‐Natal and Gauteng. Hindus comprised about 1% of the population of South Africa, but 3,9% of the population of KwaZulu‐Natal.97 Case law pertaining to the right to freedom of conscience and religion 163. During the period under review, the right to express one’s religion received judicial affrimation in a variety of cases. For example, in the case of Antonie v Governing Body, Settlers High School98 a learner had been found guilty of “serious misconduct” for coming to school with dreadlocks and a cap – something which was considered part of her religious practice as a Rastafarian. The school decided that she had violated the school’s code of conduct that had a rule about the appearance of learners. The Cape High Court set aside the decision of the governing body on the basis that it should have given ‘adequate recognition’ to the values and principles in the Constitution, including the learner’s need to have freedom of expression. 164. In the case of MEC for Education; Kwazulu-Natal v Pillay99 the Constitutional Court heard an appeal from the KwaZulu-Natal High Court concerning the right of a learner to wear a nose stud to school. In 2004 Sunali Pillay returned to Durban Girls’ High School from the spring holiday with a small nose stud. The school decided that Sunali should not be allowed to wear the stud. Her mother took the school and the KwaZulu-Natal MEC for Education to the Equality Court alleging that they had unfairly discriminated against Sunali and had violated her religious and cultural rights. 165. The Equality Court found that the school had not unfairly discriminated against Sunali. On appeal, the High Court overturned the decision, finding that the school had discriminated against Sunali and that the discrimination was unfair. The High Court declared the decision prohibiting the wearing of a nose stud, in school, by Hindu/Indian learners to be null and void. Both the school and the Department appealed directly to the Constitutional Court. 166. Langa CJ wrote the majority judgment and found that the rule prohibiting the wearing of jewellery had the potential for indirect discrimination because it allowed certain groups of learners to express their religious and cultural identity freely, while denying that same right to others. The evidence before the Court showed that the wearing of a nose stud was a voluntary practice that formed part of Sunali’s South Indian Tamil Hindu culture, which was part of her Hindu religion. The school had therefore interfered with Sunali’s 97 General Household Survey, 2013 2002 (4) SA 738 (C) 99 2008 (2) BCLR 99 (CC) 98 49