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
26 April 2019 | Story Opinion article by Dr Chitja Twala | Photo Sonia Small
Dr Chitja Twala
Dr Chitja Twala is the Vice-Dean of the Faculty of the Humanities at the University of the Free State.

This opinion piece is to reflect on the sacrifices and roles played by the Twelve Disciples in the Liberation Struggle in honour of #Freedom Day.

To the majority of South Africans, the struggle for liberation centres around high-profiled political leaders such as Nelson Mandela, Walter Sisulu, Govan Mbeki, Robert Sobukwe, Steve Biko, and others. Less known is the experience of a generation of young men who left South Africa clandestinely to build the ANC and spread its liberation message in places abroad. These young men became known as the Twelve Disciples of Mandela. Like many other youngsters who became political activists elsewhere in the country, this group received its political conscientisation at school at the then Bantu High School (later known as Sehunelo High School).

This group of youngsters came from the Mangaung township in Bloemfontein, although it is not clear why they were referred to as the Twelve Disciples of Mandela. When they left Bloemfontein, they were destined to join MK in exile. The formation of MK was announced on 16 December 1961. At the same time, MK began a sabotage campaign against strategic installations throughout South Africa. In a leaflet issued on 16 December 1961, the MK high command made its political allegiance quite clear by stating: “Umkhonto we Sizwe will carry on the struggle for freedom and democracy by methods which are necessary to complement the actions of the established national liberation organisations. Umkhonto we Sizwe fully supports the national liberation movement and calls on members, jointly and individually, to place themselves under the overall political guidance of the movement”. During the initial stages of its formation, MK avoided openly mentioning the ANC for tactical reasons. MK sought to protect the leadership of the ANC from reprisals by the South African government, in particular those who had nothing to do with the decision to take the route of armed struggle.

It is clear from interviews conducted with the surviving members of this group that nobody knew exactly why they were called the Twelve Disciples, except that there was a plan conceived by Mandela, called the M-Plan, calling for the total restructuring of the ANC to enable it to operate underground should it get banned. However, although several authors such as Edward Feit, Karis and Carter, Nelson Mandela, and Bruno Mtolo and a number of court records provide information on the M-Plan, details are sketchy.

The group of young men from Bloemfontein were Billy ‘Marakas’ Mokhonoana (left the country earlier than the others and allegedly died in London); Selebano ‘Tlhaps’ Matlhape (left for Tanganyika and later studied in Yugoslavia and East Germany); Theodore ‘Max’ Motobi (left for Tanganyika and underwent military training in Cuba); Moses ‘Dups’ Modupe (left for Tanganyika and later studied Economics in Yugoslavia); Benjamin ‘Lee’ Leinaeng (left for Tanganyika and later studied journalism in East Germany); Joseph Shuping ‘Coaps’ Coapoge (left for Tanganyika and later attended Lincoln and Temple Universities in the US); Elias Pule Matjoa (worked in the Ministry of Communications in Tanzania and underwent military training in Cuba. He later studied dentistry there); Percy Mokonopi (received military training in Cuba and later served on the Helsinki World Peace Council); Mochubela ‘Wesi’ Seekoie (left for Tanganyika and underwent military training in Cuba. He later studied Chemistry in the USSR); Matthew Olehile ‘Beans’ Mokgele (left for Tanganyika and became a professional boxer in exile. Following an injury, he went to East Africa and joined the MK); Bethuel Setai (left for Tanganyika and later obtained a PhD in Economics from Colombia University. He taught at the University of California Santa Cruz, and Lincoln University in the USA) ; and Peter Swartz (was an active member of the ANC from the coloured community in Bloemfontein. He met with the group in Dar es Salaam, following his arrest on his way to Tanzania. He attended Kivukoni College and later went to the UK where he attended the London School of Economics. He went missing in London in 1965, never to be seen again).

In honour of many of these unsung heroes, the history of the Twelve Disciples needs to be told to reflect what one could refer to as a ‘bottom up’ kind of history. Without doubt, this kind of history will add value to the country’s historiography about the liberation struggle and demystify the one-sided narrative that the (Orange) Free State played little if no role at all in the struggle for liberation.



News Archive

The failure of the law
2004-06-04

 

Written by Lacea Loader

- Call for the protection of consumers’ and tax payers rights against corporate companies

An expert in commercial law has called for reforms to the Companies Act to protect the rights of consumers and investors.

“Consumers and tax payers are lulled into thinking the law protects them when it definitely does not,” said Prof Dines Gihwala this week during his inaugural lecture at the University of the Free State’s (UFS).

Prof Gihwala, vice-chairperson of the UFS Council, was inaugurated as extraordinary professor in commercial law at the UFS’s Faculty of Law.

He said that consumers, tax payers and shareholders think they can look to the law for an effective curb on the enormous power for ill that big business wields.

“Once the public is involved, the activities of big business must be controlled and regulated. It is the responsibility of the law to oversee and supervise such control and regulation,” said Prof Gihwala.

He said that, when undesirable consequences occur despite laws enacted specifically to prevent such results, it must be fair to suggest that the law has failed.

“The actual perpetrators of the undesirable behaviour seldom pay for it in any sense, not even when criminal conduct is involved. If directors of companies are criminally charged and convicted, the penalty is invariably a fine imposed on the company. So, ironically, it is the money of tax payers that is spent on investigating criminal conduct, formulating charges and ultimately prosecuting the culprits involved in corporate malpractice,” said Prof Gihwala.

According to Prof Gihwala the law continuously fails to hold companies meaningfully accountable to good and honest business values.

“Insider trading is a crime and, although legislation was introduced in 1998 to curb it, not a single successful criminal prosecution has taken place. While the law appears to be offering the public protection against unacceptable business behaviour, it does no such thing – the law cannot act as a deterrent if it is inadequate or not being enforced,” he said.

The government believed it was important to facilitate access to the country’s economic resources by those who had been denied it in the past. The Broad Based Economic Empowerment Act of 2003 (BBEE), is legislation to do just that. “We should be asking ourselves whether it is really possible for an individual, handicapped by the inequities of the past, to compete in the real business world even though the BBEE Act is now part of the law?,” said Prof Gihwala.

Prof Gihwala said that judges prefer to follow precedent instead of taking bold initiative. “Following precedent is safe at a personal level. To do so will elicit no outcry of disapproval and one’s professional reputation is protected. The law needs to evolve and it is the responsibility of the judiciary to see that it happens in an orderly fashion. Courts often take the easy way out, and when the opportunity to be bold and creative presents itself, it is ignored,” he said.

“Perhaps we are expecting too much from the courts. If changes are to be made to the level of protection to the investing public by the law, Parliament must play its proper role. It is desirable for Parliament to be proactive. Those tasked with the responsibility of rewriting our Companies Act should be bold and imaginative. They should remove once and for all those parts of our common law which frustrate the ideals of our Constitution, and in particular those which conflict with the principles of the BBEE Act,” said Prof Gihwala.

According to Prof Gihwala, the following reforms are necessary:

• establishing a unit that is part of the office of the Registrar of Companies to bolster a whole inspectorate in regard to companies’ affairs;
• companies who are liable to pay a fine or fines, should have the right to take action to recover that fine from those responsible for the conduct;
• and serious transgression of the law should allow for imprisonment only – there should be no room for the payment of fines.
 

Prof Gihwala ended the lecture by saying: “If the opportunity to re-work the Companies Act is not grabbed with both hands, we will witness yet another failure in the law. Even more people will come to believe that the law is stupid and that it has made fools of them. And that would be the worst possible news in our developing democracy, where we are struggling to ensure that the Rule of Law prevails and that every one of us has respect for the law”.

 

 

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