Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
15 January 2019 | Story Charlene Stanley
COURT Case
From the left: Prof Danie Brand, Director of the Free State Centre for Human Rights, with his co-counsel Anna-Marie de Vos SC and their legal opponents Lawrie Wilkin and Uday Kiran Naidoo during the Grootkraal case in the Supreme Court of Appeal in Bloemfontein.

 

What rights do black farming families have on land they obtained during a period when restrictive legislation made it impossible for black people to own land?

This was the legal issue at stake in the matter of Grace Maledu v Itereleng Bakgatla Mineral Resources. In this case, 13 families of the Lesetlheng Village Community in the North-West Province bought a farm a hundred years ago. Apartheid-era legislation prohibited them from owning land, and the land was held in trust for them by the state.

Their descendants were recently threatened with eviction, after a multi-national mining company obtained mining rights on the land.    

Free State Centre for Human Rights Getting Involved

Lawyers for Human Rights in Pretoria instructed Professor Danie Brand, Director of the Free State Centre for Human Rights on the Bloemfontein Campus, to act as co-counsel for the community in the High Court and the Constitutional Court.

The Constitutional Court has now ruled in favour of the Lesetlheng community, upholding their rights to continue farming.  The judgment effectively protects them against the mining company’s attempt to evict them. It also establishes the important principle that a holder of a mining right may not commence with mining on land, unless it has made a reasonable effort in good faith to reach an agreement with the actual people who use and occupy that land.

“This constitutes an important development in our law,” explains Prof Brand. “It establishes that nobody should have absolute control over land and that different rights to and interests in land can overlap without one trumping the other.”

Assisting Farm Workers

The centre also recently  assisted a community of farm workers in the Western Cape who were threatened with eviction from a portion of the Grootkraal Farm where they have conducted church, school, and other community activities for the past 200 years. Prof Brand acted as co-counsel in this case before the Supreme Court of Appeal in Bloemfontein, where judgment was delivered in their favour.

These two cases herald the re-establishment of a legal services division within the Free State Centre for Human Rights, giving effect to their community-engagement mandate.

 

What rights do black farming families have on land they obtained during a period when restrictive legislation made it impossible for black people to own land?

This was the legal issue at stake in the matter of Grace Maledu v Itereleng Bakgatla Mineral Resources. In this case, 13 families of the Lesetlheng Village Community in the North-West Province bought a farm a hundred years ago. Apartheid-era legislation prohibited them from owning land, and the land was held in trust for them by the state.

Their descendants were recently threatened with eviction, after a multi-national mining company obtained mining rights on the land. 
 

Free State Centre for Human Rights Getting Involved

Lawyers for Human Rights in Pretoria instructed Professor Danie Brand, Director of the Free State Centre for Human Rights on the Bloemfontein Campus, to act as co-counsel for the community in the High Court and the Constitutional Court.

The Constitutional Court has now ruled in favour of the Lesetlheng community, upholding their rights to continue farming.  The judgment effectively protects them against the mining company’s attempt to evict them. It also establishes the important principle that a holder of a mining right may not commence with mining on land, unless it has made a reasonable effort in good faith to reach an agreement with the actual people who use and occupy that land.

“This constitutes an important development in our law,” explains Prof Brand. “It establishes that nobody should have absolute control over land and that different rights to and interests in land can overlap without one trumping the other.”

Assisting Farm Workers

The centre also recently  assisted a community of farm workers in the Western Cape who were threatened with eviction from a portion of the Grootkraal Farm where they have conducted church, school, and other community activities for the past 200 years. Prof Brand acted as co-counsel in this case before the Supreme Court of Appeal in Bloemfontein, where judgment was delivered in their favour.

These two cases herald the re-establishment of a legal services division within the Free State Centre for Human Rights, giving effect to their community-engagement mandate.

News Archive

The UFS issues a statement regarding the outcome of recent court case
2014-09-15

A significant number of reports appeared in the media the past week regarding this alleged attack, which happened on the Bloemfontein Campus of the UFS on 17 February 2014.

Although the senior leadership of the UFS is always in favour of good and objective journalism, we find it unfortunate that some of the facts are reported in a misleading and/or inaccurate way by some of the local media.

It is important to us that the true facts are stated. Not only for the sake of those involved, but also for our staff, students, alumni and other important stakeholders.

Here are the facts:

1.    The university was not the complainant. The alleged incident was reported to the South African Police Service (SAPS) by the victim, Muzi Gwebu, and the charges were laid by the State.

2.    At no point did the university management in any of its public statements describe this incident as a case of racism; not once. Charges of racism, then and now, must be proven, not assumed to be true simply because someone alleges racism. That is our standard approach, then and now.

3.    Cobus Muller and Charl Blom were suspended by the university, not expelled – pending the results of the court case. Emotions were running high among members of the student body and, on grounds of the evidence available to the university management at the time, as well as concerns for student and campus safety, they were suspended pending the outcome of a court hearing. This is normal procedure. Suspension does not mean you are guilty; it means you have a case to answer, either according to the university's disciplinary procedures or in the courts. For these reasons the university management will not apologise for the suspension.

4.    The university awaited the outcome of the court case before deciding whether disciplinary action should also be taken against Cobus Muller and Charl Blom. In the light of both the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) and the Regional Court rulings, the university management subsequently decided to lift the suspensions of both Muller and Blom from all campuses of the university with immediate effect.

Muzi Gwebu laid serious charges with the SAPS almost immediately after the incident, and the university management believed, on the evidence then available, that the students had a case to answer.
 
5.    As the Director of Public Prosecutions decides on who will be prosecuted and who not, there are no grounds for the university to pay the legal fees of any of the students in this case.
 
Finally:
The University of the Free State will not be fazed by inaccurate and distorted information, rumour and exaggerations. We are still striving to become a truly excellent university, with a focus on the academic, but also the human development of our students.

Issued by: Lacea Loader (Director: Communication and Brand Management)
Tel: +27 (0) 51 401 2584 | +27 (0) 83 645 2454
E-mail: news@ufs.ac.za

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