Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
09 September 2019 | Story Valentino Ndaba | Photo Charl Devenish
Silent march
Students and staff marched in solidarity with other South African universities against gender-based violence.

“Now is a time for us as men to say from the bottom of our hearts that indeed we are ashamed. Not only are we ashamed, we will speak and act against any form of violence. The very same people you see here are the very same people we need to protect, and if we do not protect them then we are rotten fruits,” said Katleho Lechoo, President of the Student Representative Council (SRC) at a silent march against gender-based violence held on the Bloemfontein Campus.

On Friday 6 September 2019, the University of the Free State (UFS) executive management and the SRC suspended all academic activities on its three campuses as a gesture of solidarity with the national movement opposing the rape, murder, and abuse of women across the country. A prayer service was also held on the Qwaqwa Campus. The UFS community came out in numbers to mourn victims and stand in support with survivors and those affected by gender-based violence

Remembering Uyinene, Jesse, and many others
Prof Francis Petersen, UFS Rector and Vice-Chancellor, said the recent rape and murder of 19-year-old Media and Film Studies student at the University of Cape Town (UCT), Uyinene Mrwetyana, and the murder of University of Western Cape (UWC) student, Jesse Hess, are painful reminders of the pervasive nature of misogyny and patriarchal violence that impedes the freedom of women in South Africa. “The UFS stands in solidarity with UCT and UWC and all other SA universities that are currently steeped in this national crisis,” he said.

Prof Petersen then called on the Department of Higher Education, civil society, the business sector, and all other roleplayers to actively contribute to efforts to eradicate gender violence. “As a university, we call specifically on the city of Bloemfontein, the mayor, members of local government, the South Africa Police Service and all inhabitants to assist us in making our city safe.”

Reading from the statement of commitment declaring the position of the UFS, Prof Petersen said: “In light of the ongoing violence against women and the recent surge of femicide in SA, the UFS commits itself to challenge, fight, and eradicate all forms of gender-based violence on its campuses and in our country.”

Cry our beloved country
At the end of the proceedings, Prof Puleng LenkaBula called for change, following emotive addresses by student leaders. “The poem and the speeches that have been made are demonstrative of the woundedness of our hearts, of our souls, of our bodies, and the fact that women’s bodies have been made a battleground. Therefore as a university it is important that we recommit ourselves to ensuring that our legs and our thighs do not define us but who we are as human beings is respected,” said the Vice-Rector: Institutional Change, Student Affairs, and Community Engagement.

“Enough is enough!”

Related:


University of the Free State's position on Gender-Based violence




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