Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
02 July 2019 | Story Leonie Bolleurs
Edwin Skhosana
Edwin Skhosana is working hard to become a successful and competent actuary one day. With him is his lecturer, Dr Michael von Maltitz.

Edwin Skhosana, an Actuarial Sciences student, was described by his lecturer, Dr Michael von Maltitz of the Department of Mathematical Statistics and Actuarial Science, as ‘very quiet’ in his Causal Inference class. 

This may sound like a compliment, but it’s not.

For Dr Von Maltitz, being quiet is definitely not encouraged – not with the new teaching methods applied in class.

“See, my class is all about engagement – getting the students to watch videos on the topics, read about the methods in question, and then come to class to grill me about things they don’t understand. This change in teaching method is extremely disconcerting for many Mathematical students, who have up until now only been taught in the ‘memorise-regurgitate’ form they had ever since the start of high school,” he explains.

Future success


“My goal is to get the students to a level of understanding where they can sit down with me or with an expert in the field and have a conversation about the Mathematical Statistics topics that I teach. This is a very difficult task in such a technical module, and few students ever feel comfortable enough to engage with me actively in class in this way,” Dr Von Maltitz points out. 

Edwin is working hard towards applying the skills and knowledge he has obtained at university to become a successful and competent actuary one day. 

An important turning point was when it dawned on him how the things discussed in class could find an important practical application in so many fields.  

“This suddenly drove a spontaneous fascination in my mind that led me to engage with Dr Von Maltitz,” the previously quiet Edwin explains.

And everything changed.

Desperate to learn

Dr Von Maltitz explains: “Edwin came to my office to ask some questions. The incredible thing was that he sat down, and a conversation about the Mathematics, the foundations, and the methods just flowed between us. I have seldom had such an insightful chat about my module with a student. It was like a cascade of information just fell into place for Edwin.”

Although he sometimes still experiences his studies as challenging and grapples to adapt to the various styles of lecturing from different lecturers, Edwin now has hope for his class in Causal Inference. 

“I think Dr Von Maltitz’s way of presenting in class is excellent. It is, however, hard to grasp if you are still anchored in the old way of cramming, because he wants you to understand and be able to apply what he teaches,” says Edwin.

“It was just wonderfully refreshing to see someone so desperate to learn something (rather than just wanting to get a degree), and then actually managing to turn around a bad semester mark into such a river of understanding,” Dr Von Maltitz concludes.

Dr Michael von Maltitz
Dr Micheal von Maltitz

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