Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
17 April 2018 Photo Valentino Ndaba
Researcher probes into military presence in politics - Dr Hlengiwe Dlamini
Dr Hlengiwe Dlamini, a postdoctoral Fellow at the International Studies Group at UFS questions the nature of Zimbabwe’s leadership change in her research.

Was Zimbabwe’s leadership transition in 2017 a classical coup d’état, an unconstitutional change of government or a legal political process? Dr Hlengiwe Portia Dlamini, a postdoctoral Fellow at the University of the Free State’s International Studies Group (ISG), employed this contentious question as the backdrop to her paper titled: “The Paradoxes of Accepting/Rejecting and Constitutionalising/unconstitutionalising the 2017 Zimbabwe coup d’état through the Prism of the Organisation of African Unity and African Union Framework.” She presented her findings at the Stanley Trapido seminar held on 9 April 2018 at the Bloemfontein Campus.

Zimbabwe’s military facilitated the removal of former President Robert Mugabe from power after a 37-year rule. Dr Dlamini’s stance is that the events of 14 November 2017 were a trailblazer for a new form in coup across the globe. In veering from conventional coup elements and adapting alternative terminology in reference to overthrowing Mugabe, Zimbabwe’s military has set the pace for the rest of the world as far as the intertwining of military and politics is concerned.

Remembering 14 November

On the evening of 14 November 2017 the Zimbabwe defence force gathered around the country’s capital, Harare, and seized control of the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation and other key areas of the city. A day later the situation escalated when military spokesman Major General Sibusiso Moyo addressed the citizens via television assuring them there was no military takeover of the government. 

Mugabe’s resignation was announced on 24 November 2017 following a motion of impeachment and a vote of no confidence reinforced by a joint session of parliament and the senate as well as the ruling Zanu–PF party. 

Military and politics intersections
According to Dr Dlamini, Zimbabwe High Court Judge, retired Brigadier General George Chiweshe, justified the military intervention in November 2017 as legal, thereby setting a dangerous precedent for political change in Africa.  

Prompted by the premise that the military overthrow of governments is no longer treated as a domestic issue in the post-cold war era, Dr Dlamini argues that it has become the business of the African Union and donor organisations to intervene and stop coups when they threaten. This explains why, according to Dr Dlamini, the Zimbabwe military establishment struggled to conceal the removal of Robert Mugabe from power as a coup for fear of attracting the wrath of the African Union and other organisations. 

Whether Zimbabwe’s crisis was merely a military response to a popular call by disgruntled citizens or a coup is left to contextual interpretation. 

News Archive

Twenty years of the constitution of South Africa – cause for celebration and reflection
2016-05-11

Description: Judge Azar Cachalia Tags: Judge Azar Cachalia

Judge Azar Cachalia

The University of the Free State’s Centre for Human Rights and the Faculty of Law held the celebration of the twentieth anniversary of the adoption of the South African Constitution on 11 May 2016 on the Bloemfontein Campus.  Students and faculty members celebrated and reflected on not only the achievements of the constitution but also on perspectives regarding its relevance in modern society, and to what extent it has upheld the human rights of all citizens of South Africa.

The panel discussion started with a presentation on the pre-1996 perspective by Judge Azar Cachalia of the Supreme Court of Appeal.  Judge Cachalia reflected on his role in the realisation and upholding of the constitution, from his days as a student activist, then as an attorney representing detainees during political turmoil, and currently as a judge: “My role as an attorney was to defend people arrested for public violence. My role as a judge today is to uphold the constitution.”  He stressed the importance of the constitution today, and the responsibility institutions such as the police service have in upholding human rights.  Judge Cachalia played a significant role in drafting the new Police Act around 1990, an Act which was to ensure that the offences perpetrated by the police during apartheid did not continue in the current democratic era. Further, he pointed out that societal turmoil has the potential to make society forget about the hard work that was put into structures upholding human rights. “Constitutions are drafted in moments of calm.  It is a living document, and we hope it is not torn up when we go through social conflict, such as we are experiencing at present.”

Thobeka Dywili, a Law student at the UFS, presented her views from the new generation’s perspective.  She relayed her experience as a student teaching human rights at schools in disadvantaged communities. She realised that, although the youth are quite aware of their basic human rights, after so many years of democracy, “women and children are still seen as previously disadvantaged when they should be equal”. She pointed out that, with the changing times, the constitution needs to be looked at with a new set of eyes, suggesting more robust youth engagement on topics that affect them, using technology to facilitate discussions. She said with the help of social media, it is possible for a simple discussion to become a revolution; #feesmustfall was a case in point.

Critical perspectives on the constitution were presented by Tsepo Madlingozi of University of Pretoria and University of London. In his view, the constitution has not affected policy to the extent that it should, with great disparities in our society and glaring issues, such as lack of housing for the majority of the poor.  “Celebration of the constitution should be muted, as the constitution is based on a decolonisation approach, and does not directly address the needs of the poor. The Constitutional Court is not pro-poor.”  He posed the question of whether twenty years on, the present government has crafted a new society successfully.  “We have moved from apartheid to neo-apartheid, as black elites assimilate into the white world, and the two worlds that exist have not been able to stand together as a reflection of what the constitution stands for.”

Prof Caroline Nicholson, Dean of the Faculty of Law, encouraged more open discussions, saying such dialogues are exactly what was intended by the Centre for Human Rights. She emphasised the importance of exchanging ideas, of allowing people to speak freely, and of sharing perspectives on important issues such as the constitution and human rights.

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept