Judgment No. CCZ 7/16 11 Const. Application No. CCZ 17/15 and protection from discrimination in order to challenge and counter any discriminatory conduct in violation of those rights. In my view, s 4 of the Act, read in its entirety, does not give any succour to the applicants’ cause. On the contrary, it counters and undermines their position vis-àvis the right to education and freedom from discrimination on the ground of religion in the enjoyment of that right. Nor can the applicants derive any sustenance from the right to education enshrined in s 75 of the Constitution. Subss (1) and (4) of s 75 make it abundantly clear that the right conferred is a right to education funded and availed by the State on a gradual and progressive basis. These subsections do not confer upon citizens and permanent residents any constitutional right to private education, and they cannot conceivably do so on any logical or practical footing. Subsections (2) and (3) of s 75 deal separately with private or independent educational institutions. They permit the establishment of such institutions, subject to such State supervision and control as may be necessary to ensure that they meet prescribed reasonable standards. The right to establish and maintain an independent institution guaranteed by subs (2) must be construed not only in the physical and structural sense but to include as well the establishment and maintenance of educational and ethical standards. Conversely, the provision does not envisage any right to flout the rules and regulations designed by the institution to safeguard its educational and ethical