Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
22 March 2019 | Story Rulanzen Martin | Photo Stephen Collett
Prof Johann Rossouw Inaugural lecture
Prof Heidi Hudson, Dean of the Faculty of the Humanities; Prof Fani de Beer, Prof Rossouw’s mentor; Prof Johann Rossouw; and Dr Engela van Staden, Vice-Rector: Academic.

For Prof Johann Rossouw from the Department of Philosophy, the Naval Hill Planetarium – a digital planetarium on a hill in the centre of a modern city, was the perfect place to deliver his inaugural lecture titled, The soul of the academy.

The message of his inaugural lecture was on “the form adopted by the contemporary university, which is so focused on the quantitative that the qualitative is neglected. The focus on training is so strong that the university no longer pays attention to the education of students”.

Prof Rossouw referred to the soul of the academy as the highest in humanity, especially the part which cannot be counted. He also referred to the words of Blaise Pascal in the 17th century: “The heart has its reasons of which reason knows nothing”.

“Do we understand any of this in the contemporary university? And do we still remember the earliest origins from which the academy originated; that Philosophy is the mother discipline of all other disciplines, and how all contemporary disciplines form part of a bigger, coherent entity?” he asked.

The inaugural lecture took place on 28 February 2019. Prof Rossouw has a C2-rating from the National Research Foundation, and it is thanks to him, among other things, that the Department of Philosophy is the only South African Philosophy department with modernity studies as its main focus.

At the end of 2018, he was promoted to Professor of Philosophy at the University of the Free State (UFS), and currently he serves as acting Head of Department. “Due to Prof Rossouw’s involvement, among other things, research on African philosophy, critical theory, postcolonial thinking, and tradition and modernity is conducted in the department,” Prof Heidi Hudson (Dean: the Humanities) said.

Prof Rossouw started his formal training in Philosophy at the age of 12, and in 1991 he obtained a BA degree majoring in Philosophy and Psychology at the University of Pretoria, with distinction. He obtained his MA degree, a critical study of apartheid on the basis of Michel Foucault’s thinking, at Unisa in 1998. In 2002, he obtained his DEA in Philosophy at the University of Lyon 3 under the leadership of Régis Debray, and in 2013 his PHD on the theological trail in Bernard Stiegler’s thinking at Monsh University (Melbourne), under Michael Janover.

In 2016, he won a prize from the South African Academy for Science and Culture for one of the best Afrikaans humanity articles published in 2015.

 

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