Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Categories
UFS News Media Release Research
Years
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Months
January February March April May June July August September October November December
Previous Archive
19 November 2018 Photo Sonia Small
On Statues and Statutes MT Steyn statue creates a vital precedent
Prof Francis Petersen, UFS Rector and Vice-Chancellor

Opinion article by Prof Francis Petersen

Every morning on my way to the office, I pass this imposing figure. Elevated on a granite plinth in front of the Main Building of the University of the Free State’s Bloemfontein Campus, cast in bronze, more than twice the size of a normal person, the statue of President Marthinus Theunis Steyn is by all accounts an impressive work of art.
  
Why such a contentious figure?

Unlike Cecil John Rhodes, who has become the embodiment of colonialism in South Africa, history paints the last president of the independent Orange Free State a little more amicably: MT Steyn was an outspoken anti-imperialist, a pacifist who tried until the very end to avoid war with Britain, a humanitarian who did a lot for Boer women and children after the war.
  
However, he was also the leader of a republic that didn’t acknowledge the rights of all its ethnic groups. From a modern-day human rights perspective, his Free State was decidedly unequal and unjust.
  
In its recent report, the ministerial task team on the transformation of the heritage landscape points out that statues are never just “innocent pieces of architecture.”  They embody a strong “symbolic power” and project “the foundational values of the state and those in power.” It’s never about the persona alone, but about the totality of values he/she represents.

Situated where it is – in front of the building housing the university’s executive – the question is whether we, as the leadership of this institution, align ourselves with these values.

And if there’s any doubt, how should we go about to consider changing the status quo?

Removal of statues in the past

As South Africans, we are acutely aware of how unhappiness about statues and what they represent have been dealt with on our university campuses in the past.

Statues have been defaced, damaged, and toppled by protestors – not only in South Africa, but around the world. At the University of the Free State (UFS), it also happened with the statue of CR Swart on the Bloemfontein Campus; the same as with the statue of Cecil John Rhodes at the University of Cape Town.

There is of course a legitimate driving force behind students’ conduct: frustration about the perceived slow pace of transformation.
  
However, what should also be considered, is the heritage legislation that is in place to protect symbols that hold historical value and significance – specifically aimed at preserving our country’s cultural heritage for all its citizens.

Process followed

At the UFS, discussions regarding the possible repositioning of the MT Steyn statue date as far back as 2003. In January this year, our Integrated Transformation Plan (ITP) was launched, and the statue was identified as a priority within the work stream dealing with ‘Names, Symbols and Spaces.’

At a student engagement earlier this year, the student community, through the Student Representative Council (SRC), once again asked for the statue to be removed. It was clear that it made certain students feel unwelcome because it represented a period in history that they did not feel part of.

I realised the urgency of the matter and appointed a Special Task Team to fast-track the review of the statue’s position. Four options had to be considered during the review process: (i) retention of the statue in its current position; (ii) reinterpretation; (iii) relocation on campus; (iv) relocation to a site off campus.

The task team, made up of representatives of various campus communities, appointed an independent heritage consultant to conduct a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) as prescribed by the heritage legislation, consulted widely, and gathered qualitative data. This encompassed a two-month-long public participation process.

Great effort went into inviting people to comment on the position of the statue, like erecting a giant reflective column in front of the statue, effectively erasing it out from a frontal view of the Main Building. Seven questions in English, Afrikaans, and Sesotho about the statue and the person it represents, cement benches to invite reflection, and a suggestion box for comments completed the picture. In addition, I also had various individual meetings with relevant role players, including members of the Afrikaans community on campus, the SRC, and alumni.
  
Robust discussion sessions were facilitated on campus, and various opinion articles were carried widely in the media.

As there is no precedent for such a process under current South African legislation, the task team was guided at all times by principles of fairness, inclusivity, and objectivity.

The Special Task Team has now presented the university’s executive with a report, and a final decision on the position of the statue will be made during a meeting of the University Council on 23 November 2018.

What we learned

I have repeatedly been asked whether the time, effort, and resources we’ve poured into the process around deciding the statue’s future have been worth it. My answer is consistently a resounding “yes”. 

Through this process, everyone involved with our university were given the opportunity to express their opinions on this aspect of its future. It was a chance to really listen to one another.

Where discussions sometimes became one-sided and overbearing, we could use it as an opportunity to lay down the rules for respectful debating as a quid pro quo for future discussions on any matter.

In short: The two-month public participation period was a fruitful time of discussion, reflection, and communication. 

A time of deliberate stocktaking on the values which are important for all our communities.
  
Road ahead

Whatever the final decision on the Steyn statue, it is bound to dissatisfy some. That much is unavoidable. 

However, I believe that this should not inevitably lead to division on our campuses. I see the wake of the statue journey as an opportunity to foster a new university citizenship based on the value of caring – a value that we all treasure.

The past few months have given us a chance to think deeply about what it truly means to care; also, to reflect on how we should apply this value in order to be a university where equality, social justice, tolerance, and forward-looking is actively lived out every day. 

A place where everyone truly feels welcome – and involved.

News Archive

Inaugural lecture: Prof Robert Bragg, Dept. of Microbial, Biochemical and Food Biotechnology
2006-05-17



Attending the inaugural lecture were in front from the left Prof Robert Bragg (lecturer at the Department of Microbial, Biochemical and Food Biotechnology) and Frederick Fourie (Rector and Vice-Chancellor).  At the back from the left were Prof James du Preez (Departmental Chairperson:  Department of Microbial, Biochemical and Food Biotechnology) and Prof Herman van Schalkwyk (Dean: Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences). Photo: Stephen Collett
 

A summary of an inaugural lecture delivered by Prof Robert Bragg at the University of the Free State:

CONTROL OF INFECTIOUS AVIAN DISEASES – LESSONS FOR MAN?

Prof Robert R Bragg
Department of Microbial, Biochemical and Food Biotechnology
University of the Free State

“Many of the lessons learnt in disease control in poultry will have application on human medicine,” said Prof Robert Bragg, lecturer at the University of the Free State’s (UFS) Department of Microbial, Biochemical and Food Biotechnology during his inaugural lecture.

Prof Bragg said the development of vaccines remains the main stay of disease control in humans as well as in avian species.  Disease control can not rely on vaccination alone and other disease-control options must be examined.  

“With the increasing problems of antibiotic resistance, the use of disinfection and bio security are becoming more important,” he said.

“Avian influenza (AI) is an example of a disease which can spread from birds to humans.  Hopefully this virus will not develop human to human transmission,” said Prof Bragg.

According to Prof Bragg, South Africa is not on the migration route of water birds, which are the main transmitters of AI.  “This makes South Africa one of the countries less likely to get the disease,” he said.

If the AI virus does develop human to human transmission, it could make the 1918 flu pandemic pale into insignificance.  During the 1918 flu pandemic, the virus had a mortality rate of only 3%, yet more than 50 million people died.

Although the AI virus has not developed human-to-human transmission, all human cases have been related to direct contact with infected birds. The mortality rate in humans who have contracted this virus is 67%.

“Apart from the obvious fears for the human population, this virus is a very serious poultry pathogen and can cause 100% mortality in poultry populations.  Poultry meat and egg production is the staple protein source in most countries around the world. The virus is currently devastating the poultry industry world-wide,” said Prof Bragg.

Prof Bragg’s research activities on avian diseases started off with the investigation of diseases in poultry.  “The average life cycle of a broiler chicken is 42 days.  After this short time, they are slaughtered.  As a result of the short generation time in poultry, one can observe changes in microbial populations as a result of the use of vaccines, antibiotics and disinfectants,” said Prof Bragg.   

“Much of my research effort has been directed towards the control of infectious coryza in layers, which is caused by the bacterium Avibacterium paragallinarum.  This disease is a type of sinusitis in the layer chickens and can cause a drop in egg product of up to 40%,” said Prof Bragg.

The vaccines used around the world in an attempt to control this disease are all inactivated vaccines. One of the most important points is the selection of the correct strains of the bacterium to use in the vaccine.

Prof Bragg established that in South Africa, there are four different serovars of the bacterium and one of these, the serovar C-3 strain, was believed to be unique to Southern Africa. He also recently discovered this serovar for the first time in Israel, thus indicating that this serovar might have a wider distribution than originally believed.

Vaccines used in this country did not contain this serovar.  Prof Bragg established that the long term use of vaccines not containing the local South African strain resulted in a shift in the population distribution of the pathogen.

Prof Bragg’s research activities also include disease control in parrots and pigeons.   “One of the main research projects in my group is on the disease in parrots caused by the circovirus Beak and Feather Disease virus. This virus causes serious problems in the parrot breeding industry in this country. This virus is also threatening the highly endangered and endemic Cape Parrot,” said Prof Bragg.

Prof Bragg’s research group is currently working on the development of a DNA vaccine which will assist in the control of the disease, not only in the parrot breeding industry, but also to help the highly endangered Cape Parrot in its battle for survival.

“Not all of our research efforts are directed towards infectious coryza or the Beak and Feather Disease virus.  One of my Masters students is currently investigating the cell receptors involved in the binding of Newcastle Disease virus to cancerous cells and normal cells of humans. This work will also eventually lead to a possible treatment of cancer in humans and will assist with the development of a recombinant vaccine for Newcastle disease virus,” said Prof Bragg.

We are also currently investigating an “unknown” virus which causes disease problems in poultry in the Western Cape,” said Prof Bragg.
 
“Although disinfection has been extensively used in the poultry industry, it has only been done at the pre-placement stage. In other words, disinfectants are used before the birds are placed into the house. Once the birds are placed, all use of disinfectants stops,” said Prof Bragg.

“Disinfection and bio security can be seen as the ‘Cinderella’ of disease control in poultry.  This is also true for human medicine. One just has to look at the high numbers of people who die from hospital-acquired infections to realise that disinfection is not a concept which is really clear in human health care,” said Prof Bragg.

Much research has been done in the control of diseases through vaccination and through the use of antibiotics. “These pillars of disease control are, however, starting to crumble and more effort is needed on disinfection and bio security,” said Prof Bragg.

Prof Bragg has been working in close co-operation with a chemical manufacturing company in Stellenbosch to develop a unique disinfectant which his highly effective yet not toxic to the birds.

As a result of this unique product, he has developed the continual disinfection program for use in poultry. In this program the disinfectant is used throughout the production cycle of the birds. It is also used to ensure that there is excellent pre-placement disinfection.

“The program is extensively used for the control of infectious diseases in the parrot-breeding industry in South Africa and the product has been registered in 15 countries around the world with registration in the USA in the final process,” said Prof Bragg.

“Although the problem of plasmid mediated resistance to disinfectants is starting to rear its ugly head, this has allowed for the opening of a new research field which my group will hopefully exploit in the near future,” he said.

 

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