Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
10 September 2019 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Leonie Bolleurs
student dialogue
Dialogues presented by the Office for International Affairs provide a safe space for people to voice their opinions, to learn, and to engage. Here are, from the left: Montsi Ramonaheng, third-year BSc student majoring in Biochemistry and Genetics; Lebohang Lesenyeno, third-year LLB student; Motsaathebe Serekoane, Lecturer in Anthropology; and Bulelwa Moikwatlhai from the Office for International Affairs.

Will the creation of one African country solve the problem of xenophobia? 

This was the question raised at a recent dialogue session on the University of the Free State Bloemfontein Campus.

Most attendees believed the concept of ‘one Africa’ implied that only one language and one dominant culture would be needed – resulting in the spirit of multiculturalism ceasing to exist. When one speaks of a united Africa, it means that the continent recognises the diversity of its cultures and embraces these diversities. It was concluded that one Africa was not a solution to ending xenophobia.

Awareness of xenophobia from a human rights perspective

The Office for International Affairs hosted the two-dialogue series aimed at addressing an array of social issues such as xenophobia, cultural appropriation, and xenocentrism. They wanted to demonstrate the influence these issues have – not only on the mindsets of individuals, but also on how it can contribute towards the development of an unjust society devoid of embracing difference.

The first session was titled: Burn the Phobia, with the theme: ‘We are all foreigners somewhere’. The aim of this dialogue was to create awareness of xenophobia from a human rights perspective. 

Recently, a second dialogue session was presented, with the theme ‘Appropriation vs Xenocentrism’. According to Bulelwa Moikwatlhai, Officer in the Office for International Affairs, the purpose of this session was to encourage people to appreciate their own cultures and to respect other peoples’ cultures.

“We wanted to critically discuss cultural appropriation versus xenocentrism in an attempt to find a human response that is inclusive in nature,” says Moikwatlhai.

Direct outflow of UFS Integrated Transformation Plan

The lecture was presented by Motsaathebe Serekoane, Lecturer in the Department of Anthropology at the UFS, who urged attendees to always keep it authentic. He also stated that, as boundaries between the North and the South collapsed and knowledge flowed in and out, knowledge from the South was not taken seriously. 

“We lost ourselves within what happened in the North. We want to be appropriate and we want what they have, because it is more beautiful than what we have. We need to find something in Africa that will define us as African,” he says. 

These dialogues are a build-up to the International Cultural Diversity Festival that will take place at the Thakaneng Bridge on 13 September 2019 from 12:00 to 14:00.

The dialogue is a direct outflow of the university’s Integrated Transformation Plan. “We strive to cultivate a culture where everyone feels welcome and comfortable. We want to create common ground for international and South African students to get together and to collaboratively discuss issues from both parties in order to find innovative solutions to student challenges,” indicates Moikwatlhai.

Much of what is learnt in these sessions is used for reflection in order to improve the overall student experience. According to Miokwatlhai, it is essential to ensure that all processes related to students are structured to be socially just and inclusive. 

“As an institution of higher learning, we need to continuously create such platforms so that we have rich engagements about pertinent issues that affect the UFS community, and find human solutions to overcome barriers,” she concludes.

News Archive

Protection of Information bill- opinions from our experts
2011-11-28

Prof. Hussein Solomon
Senior Professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of the Free State. 

In recent years, given their failure to effectively govern, the ANC has become increasingly defensive. These defensive traits have become particularly acute in light of the various corruption scandals that members of the ruling party involve themselves in.
 
Given the fact that for now they are assured of an electoral majority (largely on account of their anti-apartheid credentials), coupled with the fact that they have managed to make parliament a rubber stamp of the executive as opposed to holding the executive accountable, it is the media which has increasingly held the ruling party to account by exposing such corruption and incompetence in government.
 
The passing of the information bill, therefore, is not merely an attack on the media, but an attack on the pivotal issue of accountability. Without accountability, there can be no democracy.
 
By defining national interest broadly, by refusing to accept a public interest clause in the bill, the ANC increasingly shows its disdain to South Africa's constitution and its citizens.
 
More importantly, as former Minister of Intelligence and ANC stalwart Ronnie Kasrils pointedly makes clear, the ANC is also betraying its own noble struggle against the odious apartheid regime. It was the media which played a key role in exposing apartheid's excesses, it is the same media which is coming under attack by the heirs of PW Botha's State Security Council - Minister of State Security Siyabong Cwele and his security apparatchiks whose mindsets reflect more Stalin's Gulag's than the values of the Freedom Charter.
 
The passing of this bill is also taking place at a time when journalists have had their phones attacked, where the judiciary has been deliberately undermined and parliament silenced.
 
Democrats beware!

 
Prof. Johann de Wet
Chairperson: Department of Communication Science 
 
The ANC’s insistence on passing the Protection of State Information Bill in its current form and enforcing it by law, means that the essence of our democratic state and the quality of life of every citizen is at stake.
 
Yes, our freedom as academics, researchers, mass media practitioners and citizens comes into play. Freedom implies the right to choose and is, along with equality, an underlying principle which helps make democracy happen. While the South African state needs to protect (classify) information which could threaten its security and/or survival, the omission of a public interest clause in the Bill at this stage effectively denies a citizen the right to freedom of information.
 
 Freedom of information, along with press freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of association and religious freedom, are essential to democracy. These freedoms are granted because they conform to basic liberal ideas associated with (Western) democracy and which resonate with South Africa’s liberal constitution, such as (1) belief in the supreme value of the individual (and thus not of the state); (2) belief that the individual has natural rights (rights which belong to all human beings by nature – such as the right to life and to control government)) which exist independently of government, and which ought to be protected by and against government; and (3) recognition of the supreme value of the individual. 
 
One wonders how many cases of South African government corruption and mismanagement would have been uncovered by investigative journalists over the past number of years if this Bill in its current form was on the statute books. This Bill represents a backward step from the promise of democracy of having an informed public. The former National Party government had similar laws in place and one does not want to go there again. The infamous Information Scandal in South Africa of some thirty years ago, or Muldergate as it has come to be known, reminds one of what governments can do when it works clandestinely.
 
What South Africans need, is more information on what government structures are doing and how they are doing it with taxpayers’ money, not less information. While information in itself does not equal communication or dialogue, it is an indispensable part thereof, and the need for dialogue based on verifiable information is urgent for meeting vexed challenges facing South African communities. Academics in all fields of specialisation are constantly in need of untainted information to pursue answers and/or offer solutions to where South Africa should be moving in all spheres of life.

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