Judgment No. CCZ 7/16 10 Const. Application No. CCZ 17/15 admission to any school on the grounds of his creed, etc. The plain wording of this subsection is silent as to any discrimination that might occur after the child has been admitted to the school. It would, in my view, be improper to extend the express language of the provision to cover conduct that is omitted, particularly where its contravention imports criminal sanction in terms of subs (4). This view is fortified by paragraph (a) of subs (5) which affords the accused person a defence against a criminal charge for an offence under subs (2) with specific reference to admission to the school. In short, the prohibition envisaged by s 4(2) does not extend to any allegedly discriminatory conduct committed after admission to the school. Secondly, the defence contemplated by paragraph (a) of subs (5) is also very specific. It enables the accused person to justify his refusal to admit or discriminate on the ground of creed on the basis that the school concerned is controlled by a religious organisation and that members of that religious organisation or adherents of a particular religious belief are accorded preference in admission to that school. In effect, this provision expressly allows discrimination in admission to the school on the ground of creed or religion in the circumstances prescribed. Of course, this does not mean that a child who is deliberately discriminated against on the ground of religion after his or her admission to the school is left without any legal recourse or remedy. Depending on the circumstances of the case, he or she will always be entitled to invoke the constitutional rights to freedom of religion