Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
28 January 2020 | Story Rulanzen Martin | Photo Pexels
Conference
At the meet-and-greet last night, were from left Prof Ruad Ganzevoort, Diversity Officer and Dean of Theology and Religion at VUA, Prof Francis Petersen and Dr Gene Block, Chancellor of UCLA.

The Unit for Institutional Change and Social Justice at the University of the Free State (UFS) is hosting a colloquium on Fragility and Resilience: Facets, Features and Transformation in Higher Education which started on 29 January, with the official progamme concluding on 30 January 2020.

The colloquium is a annual collaborative partnership between the UFS, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), and the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (VUA).

Apart from the overarching themes the colloquium also placed some focus on mental health, within this context as all three regions are witnessing a spike in mental health issues among students and staff as well as a deficit in terms of being able to sufficiently address the crisis.

“All three universities are committed to discussing global developments in diversity and transformation in higher education to discussing global developments in diversity and transformation as it may constitute itself in higher education circles around the globe,” says Dr Dionne van Reenen, convener of the 2020 colloquium and research fellow at the unit.  

The idea is to discuss what has and has not worked and, hopefully, access best practices in a variety of contexts. The partnership between the three universities spans over six years starting in 2014 when the UFS first hosted the research colloquium. It is the third time the UFS has hosted the colloquium.
 
Prof Francis Petersen, Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the UFS, along with other members of the UFS Rectorate, attended a meet-and-greet on Monday 28 January 2020, and was joined by Dr Gene Block, Chancellor of UCLA, Vice Provosts Cindy Fan, Patricia Turner, Charles Alexander, Professors Abel Valenzuela, John Hamilton and Dr Shalom Staub, director of Community Learning, as well as Prof Ruard Ganzevoort, Chief Diversity Officer and Dean of Theology and Religion at VUA 

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