Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
21 December 2020

It gives the University of the Free State (UFS) great pleasure to announce that honorary degrees will be conferred in 2021 on Dr Sipho Pityana, Dr Winnie Byanyima, Prof Adipala Ekwamu and Justice Zak Yacoob.

The awarding of the honorary degrees was approved during the meeting of the UFS Council on 27 November 2020. “This remarkable group of distinguished individuals are role models for all of us, and the university is honoured to recognise them for their achievements in various fields,” says Dr Willem Louw, Chairperson of the UFS Council.
 
Dr Sipho Pityana has established himself as a leader, businessperson, adviser, investor, and consultant in South Africa. Until recently, he was the Chairperson of the Council of the University of Cape Town. He is also an established and successful business leader, chairing Anglo Gold Ashanti through very difficult times with regard to the gold price, profitability, and corporate social responsibility. As President of Business Unity South Africa, he was at the forefront of engaging government on policy that would both grow the economy and ensure development for South Africa as a whole. He made a contribution to the world of business in difficult times by bringing about transformation, innovation, and inclusive fiscal growth.

Dr Pityana is a founder of Izingwe Capital (Pty Limited), a black economic empowerment group in South Africa. He transformed the business scene in South Africa. He has also been involved in civil society organisations, notably as Chair of the Council for the Advancement of the South African Constitution (CASAC). He is an inspiration to numerous people across the country and motivates people to work hard and pursue their interests and visions.  All the positions he has held demonstrate his skill and experience in managing complex and contested organisations and processes.

Dr Winnie Byanyima is the current Executive Director of UNAIDS, based in Switzerland. She was appointed by the United Nations Secretary General, António Guterres. She is the previous Executive Director of Oxfam International, a confederation of 20 organisations working in more than 90 countries, empowering people to create a future that is secure, just, and free from poverty. Dr Byanyima is a global women’s rights leader, human rights defender, and a global authority on economic inequality. She was previously appointed to the Global Commission on the Future of Work, which was established by the International Labour Organisation, and the Commission on Global Economic Transformation, initiated by the Institute for New Economic Thinking. She served as a global ambassador for the Open Government Partnership. She has served on the United Nations (UN) High-Level Panels on Access to Medicines and on Women’s Economic Empowerment.

Prior to joining Oxfam, Dr Byanyima led the Directorate on Gender and Development at the UN Development Programme and the African Union Commission. She served 11 years in the Ugandan Parliament after having participated in Uganda’s resistance struggle against dictatorship. A signatory to her country's 1985 peace agreement, Dr Byanyima led Uganda's first parliamentary women's caucus, which championed ground-breaking gender equality provisions in the country's 1995 post-conflict constitution. In 2016, she was granted an honorary doctorate by the University of Manchester in England, which she first attended as a refugee and graduated in Aeronautical Engineering.

Prof Adipala Ekwamu, a crop scientist by training, received his BSc Agriculture in 1976 and MSc Agriculture in 1980, both from the Makerere University in Uganda, and a PhD in Plant Pathology from the Ohio State University in the United States of America.  He taught at Makerere from 1980 to 2003, rising to the position of full Professor and serving in various capacities at the university, including leading several strategic planning processes and setting up a university-wide competitive grant system to support research and student scholarship programmes. During his tenure at Makerere University, he founded the MUARIK Journal for publishing research findings from the university. In 1993, he founded the African Crop Science Society, which has remained one of the most vibrant professional societies in the continent to date. He also founded the African Crop Science Journal in 1993, which is today a leading journal in Africa.

In 2015, he founded the African Journal of Rural Development, an online open-access journal, to enable researchers and development actors to share their research and practice experiences on rural development issues in Africa. He has served on several national committees in Uganda, including leading the reform of the agricultural research system in Uganda, which led to the creation of the Uganda National Agricultural Research Organisation (NARO). He has served on several international committees, including as a member of the Advisory Committee of the International Foundation for Science, based in Sweden. In 2004, Prof Ekwamu was appointed Head of the Regional Universities Forum for Capacity Building in Agriculture (RUFORUM), a network of 85 universities in 35 African countries, where he has served for 14 years.  

Justice Zak Yacoob contributed to the law and legal profession as an anti-apartheid advocate, constitutional expert, and judge of the Constitutional Court of South Africa. As an advocate, Justice Yacoob defended numerous political prisoners charged under the apartheid laws in cases dealing with detention, house arrest, and restrictive orders. From 1985 to 1988, for example, Justice Yacoob was part of a team that defended the leadership and members of the United Democratic Front and its affiliates in the ‘Delmas Four’ treason trial.

In the 1990s, Justice Yacoob contributed to the establishment of the constitutional pillars of the new South African democracy as part of the drafting team of the Bill of Rights in the interim and final Constitution. In 1994, he served on the Independent Electoral Commission, which oversaw the first democratic elections in South Africa. Justice Yacoob was appointed to the Constitutional Court in 1998 and served as a judge of this court until his retirement 15 years later. During this time, he wrote 31 judgments, including the landmark judgment in the Grootboom case dealing with the right to housing, arguably the best-known decision of the Constitutional Court.

Justice Yacoob’s life has been one of activism. He has played a leadership role in the Natal Indian Congress, the ANC underground, and the United Democratic Front. His activism and love for South Africa continue into his retirement, exemplified in his public opposition to South Africa’s withdrawal from the International Criminal Court Statute, and his public stance against state capture. He has been heavily involved in the work of the South African National Council for the Blind and served as a board member of several NGOs. He was a member of the University of Durban-Westville Council from 1989 to 1993 and from 1995 to 1997. He was the Chancellor of this university from May 2001 until December 2003.  

News Archive

Media: Sunday Times
2006-05-20

Sunday Times, 4 June 2006

True leadership may mean admitting disunity
 

In this edited extract from the inaugural King Moshoeshoe Memorial Lecture at the University of the Free State, Professor Njabulo S Ndebele explores the leadership challenges facing South Africa

RECENT events have created a sense that we are undergoing a serious crisis of leadership in our new democracy. An increasing number of highly intelligent, sensitive and committed South Africans, across class, racial and cultural spectrums, confess to feeling uncertain and vulnerable as never before since 1994.

When indomitable optimists confess to having a sense of things unhinging, the misery of anxiety spreads. We have the sense that events are spiralling out of control and that no one among the leadership of the country seems to have a definitive handle on things.

There can be nothing more debilitating than a generalised and undefined sense of anxiety in the body politic. It breeds conspiracies and fear.

There is an impression that a very complex society has developed, in the last few years, a rather simple, centralised governance mechanism in the hope that delivery can be better and more quickly driven. The complexity of governance then gets located within a single structure of authority rather than in the devolved structures envisaged in the Constitution, which should interact with one another continuously, and in response to their specific settings, to achieve defined goals. Collapse in a single structure of authority, because there is no robust backup, can be catastrophic.

The autonomy of devolved structures presents itself as an impediment only when visionary cohesion collapses. Where such cohesion is strong, the impediment is only illusory, particularly when it encourages healthy competition, for example, among the provinces, or where a province develops a character that is not necessarily autonomous politically but rather distinctive and a special source of regional pride. Such competition brings vibrancy to the country. It does not necessarily challenge the centre.

Devolved autonomy is vital in the interests of sustainable governance. The failure of various structures to actualise their constitutionally defined roles should not be attributed to the failure of the prescribed governance mechanism. It is too early to say that what we have has not worked. The only viable corrective will be in our ability to be robust in identifying the problems and dealing with them concertedly.

We have never had social cohesion in South Africa — certainly not since the Natives’ Land Act of 1913. What we definitely have had over the decades is a mobilising vision. Could it be that the mobilising vision, mistaken for social cohesion, is cracking under the weight of the reality and extent of social reconstruction, and that the legitimate framework for debating these problems is collapsing? If that is so, are we witnessing a cumulative failure of leadership?

I am making a descriptive rather than an evaluative inquiry. I do not believe that there is any single entity to be blamed. It is simply that we may be a country in search of another line of approach. What will it be?

I would like to suggest two avenues of approach — an inclusive model and a counter-intuitive model of leadership.

In an inclusive approach, leadership is exercised not only by those who have been put in some position of power to steer an organisation or institution. Leadership is what all of us do when we express, sincerely, our deepest feelings and thoughts; when we do our work, whatever it is, with passion and integrity.

Counter-intuitive leadership lies in the ability of leaders to read a problematic situation, assess probable outcomes and then recognise that those outcomes will only compound the problem. Genuine leadership, in this sense, requires going against probability in seeking unexpected outcomes. That’s what happened when we avoided a civil war and ended up with an “unexpected” democracy.

Right now, we may very well hear desperate calls for unity, when the counter-intuitive imperative would be to acknowledge disunity. A declaration of unity where it manifestly does not appear to exist will fail to reassure.

Many within the “broad alliance” might have the view that the mobilising vision of old may have transformed into a strategy of executive steering with a disposition towards an expectation of compliance. No matter how compelling the reasons for that tendency, it may be seen as part of a cumulative process in which popular notions of democratic governance are apparently undermined and devalued; and where public uncertainty in the midst of seeming crisis induces fear which could freeze public thinking at a time when more voices ought to be heard.

Could it be that part of the problem is that we are unable to deal with the notion of opposition? We are horrified that any of us could be seen to have become “the opposition”. The word has been demonised. In reality, it is time we began to anticipate the arrival of a moment when there is no longer a single, overwhelmingly dominant political force as is currently the case. Such is the course of history. The measure of the maturity of the current political environment will be in how it can create conditions that anticipate that moment rather than seek to prevent it. We see here once more the essential creativity of the counter-intuitive imperative.

This is the formidable challenge of a popular post-apartheid political movement. Can it conceptually anticipate a future when it is no longer overwhelmingly in control, in the form in which it is currently, and resist, counter-intuitively, the temptation to prevent such an eventuality? Successfully resisting such an option would enable its current vision and its ultimate legacy to our country to manifest in different articulations, which then contend for social influence. In this way, the vision never really dies; it simply evolves into higher, more complex forms of itself. Consider the metaphor of flying ants replicating the ant community by establishing new ones.

We may certainly experience the meaning of comradeship differently, where we will now have “comrades on the other side”.

Any political movement that imagines itself as a perpetual entity should look at the compelling evidence of history. Few movements have survived those defining moments when they should have been more elastic, and that because they were not, did not live to see the next day.

I believe we may have reached a moment not fundamentally different from the sobering, yet uplifting and vision-making, nation-building realities that led to Kempton Park in the early ’90s. The difference between then and now is that the black majority is not facing white compatriots across the negotiating table. Rather, it is facing itself: perhaps really for the first time since 1994. Could we apply to ourselves the same degree of inventiveness and rigorous negotiation we displayed leading up to the adoption or our Constitution?

This is not a time for repeating old platitudes. It is the time, once more, for vision.

In the total scheme of things, the outcome could be as disastrous as it could be formative and uplifting, setting in place the conditions for a true renaissance that could be sustained for generations to come.

Ndebele is Vice-Chancellor of the University of Cape Town and author of the novel The Cry of Winnie Mandela

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