Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
03 February 2020 | Story Cobus van Jaarsveld | Photo Charl Devenish
Traffic Circle on the UFS Bloemfontein Campus
The Department of Protection Services shares how to #BSafe at traffic circles.

For the majority of drivers, one of the most confusing driving laws is the correct use of a traffic circle, especially in Bloemfontein with the large number of smaller traffic circles constructed over the past few years; also across the University of the Free State (UFS) Bloemfontein Campus.

“In fact, many motorists do not know that there is a difference between a larger traffic circle and a mini traffic circle, other than their size. Can you really be frustrated if someone cuts you off at a traffic circle if you don't know the rules? Arrive Alive has shed some light on the issue,” said Cobus van Jaarsveld, Assistant Director: Threat Detection, Investigations and Liaison in the UFS Department of Protection Services.

What is the difference between the two circles?

A traffic circle is classified as large when it has a minimum diameter of about 16 metres and a 1,5 to 2 metre flattened kerb, which allows heavy vehicles to drive onto a small section of the circle. A mini traffic circle is normally not more than seven to ten metres in diameter and the entire circle is mountable for heavy vehicles.

Are there different rules for each?

Yes – the rule of thumb is that mini traffic circles, which are usually found in residential areas, have the same rules as a four-way stop – first come first served. For larger traffic circles, which are usually found at busy crossings to assist with the traffic flow, you must give way to the right.

Rules to remember at a large traffic circle

As you arrive at a large traffic circle, traffic coming from your right has right of way, regardless of how many cars there are. Wait until there is a gap in the traffic and then ease slowly into the circle. Watch out for other traffic in the circle and be aware that they may not be using their indicators.

Use your indicators

Signal when you are going to turn – switch your indicator on immediately after passing the exit prior to the one you intend taking. If you are taking the first exit, i.e. you're turning left, then flick on your left indicator and keep in the outside/left-hand lane. Keeping in the outside/left-hand lane also works well if you're continuing straight ahead, as your exit is very close. After you've passed the left-turn exit and yours is next, signal left and you're free. If you're turning right or performing a U-turn, keep in the inside/right-hand lane. Only signal left and change into the left-hand lane once you've passed the other exits and only yours is ahead.

Rules to remember at a mini traffic circle

The first vehicle to cross the line has the right of way, so it really works on the same principle as a four-way stop or yield sign. Proceed in a clockwise direction around the circle, without driving on it.

News Archive

CR Swart Memorial Lecture: Mr Cecil le Fleur
2006-08-08

Khoe and San call for government to speed up policy dialogue with indigenous communities  

 Mr Cecil le Fleur, leader of the National Khoe-San Consultative Conference and member of the executive management of the National Khoe-San Council, has called for a national policy on indigenous peoples to protect the human rights and special needs of indigenous people in South Africa.

 Mr Le Fleur delivered the 38th CR Swart Memorial Lecture on the Khoe and San at the University of the Free State (UFS).  He commended the UFS for its serious approach to the Khoe and San and for initiating initiatives such as a research project on the Griqua in which various aspects linked to language, -culture, -history, - leadership, their role in the South African community (past and present) and the conservation of their historical cultural heritages will be covered.   

 “The policy dialogue with indigenous communities initiated by government in 1999 and supported by the International Labour Organisation (ILO), has been exceedingly slow, owing to political and bureaucratic problems,” said Mr Le Fleur.

 According to Mr Le Fleur the slow pace is also impacting negatively on the United Nations’ efforts to expand the international standards and mechanisms for human rights so as to include the special needs of indigenous peoples.

 “The successful adoption of a South African policy would probably have a major impact on the human rights culture of Africa and, more specifically, on the UN system,” he said.

 “South Africa has a powerful moral authority internationally and is willing to use this authority in multilateral forums. At this stage, however, South Africa’s Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) may not take an official position on UN instruments and declarations pertaining to indigenous issues, until the Cabinet has resolved its own domestic policy position,” he said. 

 According to Mr le Fleur it therefore came as a great surprise when the DFA brought out a positive vote in the UN for the adoption of the "Draft Declaration on the Rights of indigenous Peoples" in June this year, even before the completion of the policy process. 

 Policy consolidation in South Africa is the primary key to creating a new policy climate in Africa in order to protect the rights of indigenous peoples.  “The existing constitution of the Republic of South Africa is one of the most liberal on the continent, and embraces the concept of redress of past discrimination.  It already includes a clause (Section 6) making provision for the protection of language rights for Khoe and San peoples - the fist peoples of southern Africa,” he said. 

 “If South Africa can effectively integrate this ‘third generation’ of collective rights within an existing democratic constitution, this will send a clear message to Africa and the world that indigenous rights are a necessary component of human and civil rights in modern democracies,” he said.

 Mr Le Fleur proposed an institutional framework based on set principles that would satisfy the needs and aspirations of the Griqua and other first indigenous peoples in South Africa.  “The proposed framework was based on the notion of vulnerability as a result of colonialism and apartheid, which stripped us of our indigenous identity, cultural identity and pride as people.  This injustice can hardly be addressed within the existing mechanisms provided by the current text of the Constitution,” he said.

 Mr Le Fleur also proposed that the principles of unique first-nation status, as recognised in international law, should be applied in the construction of the framework of the constitutional accommodation for the Khoe and San. 

 Mr Le Fleur further proposed that the Khoe and San’s indigenous status in constitutional terms must be separate from the constitutional acknowledgement of their status as a cultural community, as envisaged in sections 185 and 186 of the Constitution of 1996.

 According to Mr Le Fleur, the suggested mechanism should make provision for structures such as:

  •  A statutory representative council for First Indigenous Peoples of South Africa at a national level;
  • a separate Joint Standing Committee on Indigenous and Traditional Affairs, in both the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces on which the Khoe and San can be represented;
  • a representative structure for the Khoe and San in the legislature of each relevant province; and
  • ex officio membership in the relevant structures of local government.

Media release
Issued by: Lacea Loader
Media Representative
Tel:   (051) 401-2584
Cell:  083 645 2454
E-mail:  loaderl.stg@mail.uovs.ac.za 
24 August 2006


- Full lecture
- Photo gallery
 

 

 

 

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