Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

COVID-19 and the intersectional nature of citizenship in South Africa

25 May 2020 | Story Keamogetswe Juries, Dimakatšo Veronica Masenya, Mamokoena Mokoena, and Joy Owen | Photo Photo by Magda Ehlers from Pexels

At the start of our democracy, four years into her existence, President Mbeki offered a new hopeful vision that was inclusive of our African compatriots to the north. In her rebirth, South Africa masqueraded as the land of milk and honey; a land to which the destitute, hopeless, and impoverished citizens of the rest of Africa would flee as they escaped hunger, failed states, failing healthcare systems, and certain death in the countries of their birth. In response, we treated our African neighbours variably, but most notably (and newsworthy) as pariahs of the South African state and its citizens. In short, we treated them as outsiders, akin to waste, to be erased from the South African psyche and landscape.

Yet, these African others have a history that is mired in the depths of our South African soil – they have been digging into the richness of our land, excavating diamonds, gold, and copper for decades. Mozambican. Basotho. Zimbabwean. Since the late 1970s and 1980s, Congolese, predominantly from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, first arrived in South Africa as highly educated professionals – doctors, dentists, mathematicians, and lecturers – and were employed by the South African state; then as entrepreneurs, educated refugees, and working-class asylum seekers. Soon other Africans arrived from Nigeria, Cameroon, Ghana, Liberia, Senegal, and Somalia. So too, our South Asian compatriots from Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan.

If we are to believe headline reports over the past 15 years, acceptance of those African migrants living in South African townships has been predominantly negative, with widespread xenophobic attacks against particularly working-class black African ‘foreigners’. They have been maimed, killed, and robbed of their dignity in various ways, because their citizenship was not secured within the foothills of South African soil. They have been harangued, harassed, and brutalised, because they could not speak a South African language (or so we are led to believe); they have been questioned, humiliated, and shot at by police in random raids or random searches in the streets of Johannesburg. They have been harassed in hair salons and threatened with kidnapping; they have been thrown from moving trains, necklaced and killed in Bloemfontein, Masiphumelele, Bellville, Pretoria, Philippi, Katlehong and elsewhere in South Africa. The horror of these events, these experiences, should lead to outcries. Provide a moment of pause. And yet, they have not.

Some commentators argue that the violence meted out against our African brothers and sisters is indicative of a violent South Africa. Xenophobia is thus subsumed under the aberrant reality of a violent South African population, as embodied and expressed through a virulent, oppressive, and toxic hyper-masculinity. To subsume xenophobic or Afrophobic violence in this way ironically captures African nationals as part of the contemporary South African story, enmeshed within our collective present of high unemployment, and continuing racial, gendered, and deep social inequalities. However, we are not encouraged to perceive this subtlety and nuance. Rather, prior to the arrival of COVID-19 in South Africa, xenophobia were commonplace on the streets, in taxis, in supermarkets, in Home Affairs offices, at schools, at universities, at local clinics, in townships, and in barbershops; if not in deed, then in thought and in word. The psychological distancing created by the word makwerekwere – a reference to African migrants among us – still stings.

Yet other stories exist too. For example, as xenophobia made headlines in South Africa in 2008, residents in Makhanda (then Grahamstown) protected immigrant spaza-shop owners. Women, in particular, discouraged looting of spaza shops, arguing – as elsewhere in South African lokshins – that foreing nationals fed the hungry and protected the destitute from complete and utter ruin. They allowed umama to purchase essentials such as maize meal, oil, sugar, and tea on credit. Child-headed households, old-age pensioners, and other destitute households were also assisted.

Some residents begrudgingly commented that ‘these foreigners’ worked together, combining their money and buying in bulk. By buying in bulk, they were able to purchase more products, and offer these to consumers at lower prices than their South African counterparts. The land of milk and honey had become competitive, and rather than respond to competition proactively by creating solidarity networks among themselves, many South African spaza shop owners fell into ruin.

As government’s plans for its citizens are shared during COVID-19, the silence on serving the needs of the African migrant population is deafening. Small business owners, students, barbers, cooks, hairstylists, car park attendants, pastors, traders, and entrepreneurs – they too are affected, with no recourse to government’s coffers as non-citizens. As non-citizens, government does not perceive them as bona fide beneficiaries of the state; their assumed rootlessness and statelessness leave them in a precarious quagmire, reliant on handouts from local South African and other diasporic organisations. Yet, their labour too contributes to the ticking over of South Africa’s economy. Just like you and me, they purchase food in supermarkets or vegetables from hawkers on the street; they pay taxi fares, pay university fees (much higher than South Africans), need medical care and attention, participate in illicit undertakings, fall in love, marry, live and die. More pertinently, in the time of COVID-19, they – like South Africans – also shared what they have and more with South Africans in need.

Educational migrants

From the suspension of academic activities to the total shutdown of the country, little has been noted about the experiences of African educational migrants. The suspension of academic activities on 16 March led to the closure of South African universities in an attempt to limit movement and gatherings on campuses. This reality forced students to head home. Those educational migrants who could not return home for various reasons, were accommodated by certain higher education institutions and remain in lockdown on campuses, separated from immediate family and the familiarity of ‘home’. These are anxious times.

Stop for a moment and conjure up the feelings, smells, experiences, and attachments related to home. Imagine the smile of your grandmother, the sound of your siblings’ laughter, the earthy, homely smell of your mother’s cooking; the heat of the day, the shade sought under the tree in the backyard, gossiping with favourite cousins, your grandmother, or aunt. Get lost in the stoicism of your father, and the familiar sounds of home. The sound of padded feet moving down the passage; the click of the kettle as it boils water for the day’s morning beverage. The radio or TV tuned in to the news. All of this and more provide the backdrop of familiarity, comfort, and casual belonging, ‘back home’. All of this, gone with the stroke of an ordinary ballpoint pen held by the hand of President Ramaphosa, ratifying the closure of South Africa’s borders. Gone.

Access to medical care and attention

Hard lockdown rules, including physical distancing, curtailed movement via taxis within provinces, no interprovincial travel, and a ban on street vendors and entrepreneurs limited the movement of vectors of transmission – human beings – irrespective of nationality, race, gender, age, and profession. An early attempt at curtailing movement included the closure of South Africa’s borders, which left numerous circular and economic migrants from Zimbabwe, Malawi, and Mozambique in limbo. Provision was made for African migrants whose visas expired before or during lockdown. However, asylum seekers whose request for asylum has been denied, as well as undocumented migrants, have not been provided for.

On 15 April 2020, the Centre for Human Rights and the Centre for Applied Legal Studies issued a plea to government to ensure the inclusion of African migrants in updated frameworks for healthcare during COVID-19. This plea was not without reason. Research shows that undocumented and legal migrants have met with disdain from various medical personnel when seeking urgent medical care in South Africa. Yet, the nature of the virus knows no borders. It doesn’t check your legality or illegality, nor does it ask to see your bar-coded South African identification document or identity card.

The situation we find ourselves in demands that every individual resident in South Africa be screened, tested for, and treated for COVID-19. There is no room for medical discrimination, as the efforts to curb the exponential increase in the infection rate could be nullified by this act. The vulnerable among us, irrespective of nationality, should be assisted with the promise of amnesty from prosecution and persecution. The failure to include African migrants, however categorised, threatens every other individual in her environment; and as the virus is non-discriminatory, it behoves South Africans to follow suit.

At death’s door

The government gazette dated 2 April 2020 prohibits all forms of social gatherings, with the exception of funerals. As per the rules, the number of mourners attending a funeral or cremation service should not exceed fifty. A permit for attending funerals or cremation services is obtained from the nearest magistrate’s office or police station. The applicant must produce documents such as the death certificate, and in cases where the death certificate has not yet been issued, a sworn affidavit must be submitted. The regulation further stipulates those who are eligible to attend funeral or cremation services. Relatedness to the deceased is defined as ‘close’ and is measured by blood, marriage, and/or caregiving bonds/responsibility.

These strict measures are meant to safeguard and protect the living from infection with COVID-19. As President Ramaphosa said, “we have decided to take the urgent and drastic measures to manage the disease, to protect the people of our country, and reduce the impact of the virus on our society and on our economy”, when addressing the nation on 15 March 2020.

The reference to ‘people of our country’ highlights the elephant in the room – who are the people of our country? Is the reference specific to those born in South Africa, and who thus enjoy citizenship? Or is it inclusive of migrants from the African continent, however defined? If the President’s protection extends to include migrants, how will migrant deaths be managed? The closure of our international borders have scuppered attempts to repatriate the mortal remains of the deceased; and as fears rise that COVID-19 can still be spread by the dead, will the body of an African migrant be buried or cremated in South Africa? Health authorities advised that cremation is the best method for dealing with a COVID-19 death. Yet, in the African context, cremation is complicated as it opposes certain belief systems. Further, mortuary facilities in South Africa are scarce and hardly able to respond to the potential need created by South African deaths, whether from COVID-19 or something else. Given this context, will African migrants finally be treated with dignity and respect in death?

Not every black African migrant crossing into South Africa is illegal or disempowered. There are middle-class nurses, dentists, doctors, university professors, mechanical engineers, businessmen, and researchers. However, they are not newsworthy, as their class status often removes them from physically violent persecution in local townships. In this extended COVID-19 moment, race and class are interlinked, as during segregation and apartheid in South Africa. So is nationality, gender, and health status. Depending on the social configuration of your identity, further confirmed by the national documents you carry, your chance of surviving COVID-19 in South Africa waxes or wanes. Your access to healthcare, to state assistance in the form of food aid or a social grant, depends on your citizenship status; and your health and/or death is mediated through your predefined status, inclusive of your citizenship.

The South African government will have numerous obstacles to remedy the further devastation and destitution of its citizens. We hope that the idea and characterisation of South African citizens will be inclusive of our African brothers, our African sisters, and their children. Born in South Africa, these South African children have a right to safety and security, healthcare, food, and education. Their parents too.

In the next few weeks and months, as we move through various stages of lockdown, we should not erase ‘other Africans’ in our midst. Our humanity and our collective health are intimately interwoven with the healthy existence and humanity of others – whether South African or other African – resident in South Africa. The disease does not discriminate. Neither should we. As James Baldwin said, “Where all human connections are distrusted, the human being is very quickly lost”. And as we as South Africans often say, ‘I am because you are’. Umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu.

News Archive

UFS Official opening - Address by the Rector and Vice-Chancellor, Prof Frederick Fourie

2007-02-02

2003: Continuity and change, scholarship and community, quality and equity

2004: From good to great: firming up the foundations for a great, robust university – for the next 100 years

2005: The UFS towards 2010: Sustaining change, innovation, renewal and transformation

2006: Ever better: enhancing the quality of scholarship through innovation and critical reflection

2007: Beyond redress: Towards the ‘promised land’ of a high quality, equitable, non-racial and non-sexist university

Address by the Rector and Vice-Chancellor, Prof Frederick Fourie, at the Official Opening of the University of the Free State (UFS), Friday 2 February 2007

Today’s opening address will focus on an important new document in the current history of this institution, i.e. a draft Institutional Charter. This document, which takes the brave step of reaching into the future to try to spell out the end goal of redress and transformation – the outlines and principles of a world class, high quality, equitable, non-racial and non-sexist university – is the culmination of various processes which started in 2003 (and which builds on earlier processes, of course).

Today’s story revolves around two interrelated themes: The “Academic Project” and the “Transformation Project”. (Of course, these are not mutually exclusive, since our understanding of transformation explicitly encompasses the academic enterprise … see below.)

It also is about gowns and blankets, and about a promised land.

1. The year 2006: a partial report back

So let me start with the academic project and some reflections on the ‘state of the university’, on what we have achieved during the past year or two.

1.1 Quality Assurance Audit panel report

My 2006 Opening Speech was devoted to the issue of quality. This was primarily in the light of the approaching Institutional Quality Audit by the Higher Education Quality Committee of the Council on Higher Education.

This audit of the quality assurance systems at the UFS was done in October 2006 by an audit panel of the Higher Education Quality Committee. Their main task was to establish whether the UFS has policies and procedures in place that ensure quality in everything we do as a university. We provided them with documentary evidence of such policies and procedures which the panel duly studied.

This evidence was then tested and verified during a weeklong visit to the campus during which interviews were conducted with hundreds of staff, students, alumni, Council members, business representatives, and government officials, among others.

A comprehensive written report on the outcome of the quality audit is still to be completed by the panel. However, in their verbal feedback immediately after their weeklong visit to the campus, the panel indicated that there were no serious quality risks or quality gaps in the core business of the university, namely teaching and learning, research and community service. They also complemented the University on several of its transformation initiatives, including its parallel-medium policy.

Of course there are some areas that may require attention, but these are areas which the university is aware of and which we are attending to already – as befits a university that is serious about quality.

The findings of the audit panel are very heartening indeed as it supports and validates our efforts and the progress we have made in building a robust, high quality university.

1.2 The Strategic Cluster initiative

Another aspect of our quality drive is the Strategic Clusters initiative which was formally announced at the Opening of the UFS a year ago. It represents a strategic initiative to focus our energies in a few key areas, investing in them for the UFS to become an international leader in those fields. It is imperative for the UFS to position itself, in its next phase of its development, not only as a ‘good’ teaching and research university, but as an institution that truly excels in certain strategic areas (‘clusters’) of research and knowledge – whilst continuing to provide firm general support for teaching and research excellence across the many disciplines.

A medium-sized university such as the UFS with relatively limited human, physical and financial resources has to achieve this kind of ‘critical mass’ and synergy to establish itself as a world leader in these particular clusters (in terms of its core functions of teaching/learning, research and community engagement).

Five clusters were mentioned initially. Following extensive workshops and consultation, the following six clusters are now in the process of being refined and finalised (inter alia via open campus debate):

Water Management in Water-scarce Areas
New Frontiers in Poverty Reduction and Sustainable Development
Social Transformation in Diverse Societies
Ecologically Sound Value Chains for Agricultural Commodities
Materials and Nano Sciences
Advanced Bio-molecular Systems.

(Most of these specifically include the South African and African context.)

Within the context of the Strategic Clusters, eight Research Niche Areas (RNAs) were submitted to the National Research Foundation (NRF). All eight were approved – the highest number approved at any university.

Within these eight Research Niche Areas, 25 research proposals were submitted at the end of 2006. Twenty-four (24) of these proposals were successful, representing a total commitment of nearly R30 million from the NRF over the next four years.

Linked to the Strategic Clusters, five proposals for the South African Research Chair Initiative (SARCHi) were submitted. All five pre-proposals were accepted in the first round of screening, and successful candidates have been invited to submit full proposals by the end of February. Another science council has also approached us regarding a sixth Research Chair.

Capacity building and the development of young and emerging researchers, especially from the designated groups, are proceeding briskly. The number of ThuthukaGrantholders has increased from 23 in 2006 to 45 in 2007, representing total funding of more than R5m.

Incentives based on the Research Turnaround Strategy to increase the accredited publication output, has been highly successful, with a further increase in the number of accredited publication units expected in the final 2006 tally.

At the end of last year the UFS was identified, in an international academic journal, as one of only six SA universities that are in the top 1% of world universities in terms of internationally-quoted publications research.

Although the quest for academic excellence is never ending, I think we can report that so far we appear to have been doing quite well in serving the community by being a very good university for the Free State province. The strategic clusters are an important initiative to take us to greater heights in terms of international academic leadership and being a world class institution. It is also intended to contribute substantially to the economic and social development of the Free State Province.

The other big project of 2006 was the work of the Transformation Plan Task Team. I will deal with this as part of the discussion of the Institutional Charter.

2. Transformation and the Institutional Charter

2.1 Gown and blanket and the idea of a social contract

In 2003, at my inauguration as Vice-Chancellor, I focused on two ideas.

First, the combination of the academic gown and the Seana Marena Basotho blanket. I used this combination to symbolise (a) the commitment of the UFS to uphold and strengthen the intrinsic nature of the university as an academic institution and place of science and scholarship, of learning and research, and (b) the commitment to engage with the problems of communities, notably in the context of development and poverty alleviation challenges.

This idea of an ‘engaged university’ has been developed and realised significantly since then, resulting in pioneering policies and practices on community engagement and community service (learning and research). Indeed, the UFS is recognised as a national leader in the field of community engagement, and has the largest numbers of students amongst all SA universities involved in community services learning. (It is also part of our answer to the question of being a university in and for Africa.)

Secondly, I suggested that the campus should embark on a discourse on a ‘social contract’ (an idea mooted before by prof Coetzee, if I recall correctly). I defined it as a manifesto for a “new society” university, reflecting a mutual understanding and accord between the members of the university community about the kind of university we want to transform and develop into – a manifesto for the ‘promised land’, to convey a clear vision of the road ahead, also providing a basis for addressing the fears, anxieties, expectations and frustrations arising from uncertainty and disagreement about “where we are going”.

A campus-wide social contract process was launched in 2004 and 2005. More than 800 staff members (and many students) took part in structured workshops of diverse groups. It was organised around the theme of ‘the promised land’ – a powerful metaphor that focuses the mind (with all the concomitant nuances of a prior period of slavery and oppression, and a long period in the wilderness or desert…).

There is a large body of literature, religious and secular, using and exploring the metaphor of a ‘promised land’.
Let us recall how hat Martin Luther King Jr. used the term in 1968 to indicate his dream of a state of peace, equality, brotherhood and justice for all.
A related metaphor can be found in Dante's Divine Comedy, which describes his journey through Hell, Purgatory, and Paradise.

Blunt, honest and sometimes emotional discussions took place – putting the experiences, perceptions, fears, expectations and aspirations of people from widely different backgrounds on the table, listening to each other, hearing each other – often for the first time. After the initial ‘raw’ emotions and reactions, the discussions led to proposals regarding the values and principles which should underpin the “new” UFS.

For many, the big discovery was the large degree of common ground on values. Despite divisions created by our past, clearly there was a common basis for constructing a ‘new’ UFS where everybody could belong, could pursue a career, could fulfil their human potential, could contribute to our country.

Substantive agreement emerged on the kind of place we want to work and study at. These tended to cluster around two broad themes: (a) being a high quality university, and (b) workplace values and human relations of a diverse staff and student body.

2.2 The transformation imperative and the launch of the TPTT

Two years ago, at the Official Opening of the UFS, I focused on the transformation imperative.

Noting that the UFS has gone through three phases of transformation (since 1978, but especially 1988), I argued that we must focus on going “from good to great”, and that we must firm up our foundations for a great, robust university. Robustness in a fast-changing world requires the adoption of a continual change-mode, being agile and fast-moving, innovative, and pre-emptive. Simply put: it requires continuous transformation.

A definition of transformation, as subsequently amended following the TPTT report, was proposed and adopted, as follows:

Transformation is a continual and persistent becoming:

Becoming a world class, engaged university of excellence and innovation and place of scholarship for South Africa and Africa;
Becoming an equitable, diverse, non-racial, non-sexist, multicultural, multilingual university where everyone would experience a sense of belonging and achieving;
Becoming an institution that treasures diversity as a unique source of strength and quality.

It is essential to note that this definition covers many dimensions and aspects of a university, including academic practice and focus, resource aspects, staff and student equity, institutional culture, community engagement, governance and management, student life, and so forth – always as university.

It is about deep and comprehensive transformation and change, as a university.

I then announced the launch of a fourth phase of transformation of the UFS and challenged the university to engage with the concept of best-practice transformation.

I re-iterated my view that we must embrace transformation (including the prickly issue of the African university) by unpacking it and giving it proper content. I also argued that we must nurture a culture of belonging which is more than “accommodating” different groups – we must develop an entirely new institutional culture with non-dominance as norm, a strong sense of common values, and a sense of belonging for all, black and white, female and male.

To tackle this challenge, a Transformation Plan Task Team was announced and appointed. Under the able leadership of dr Ezekiel Moraka and prof Teuns Verschoor, it contained a cross-section of some of the best young minds at the university, young black and white leaders, academics as well as support staff.

2.3 The TPTT report

The Report of the TPTT, and an accompanying proposed Transformation Plan, was presented to the Executive Management in October 2006. Their deliberations followed wide consultations with both internal and external stakeholders, including members of the Free State Provincial Government.

The report provided a wide-ranging and thorough analysis of the state of transformation at the UFS, and of the challenges remaining. A comprehensive set of proposals was presented on the following broad areas:

Institutional culture (including language policy)
Academic issues (responsiveness, access, diversity)
Governance and management
Employment Equity

Subsequently these have been discussed by the Senate, the Council, and the Executive Management. Further campus debate will be facilitated in the near future.

Today I can announce that the Executive Management has adopted all the proposals of the TPTT in principle. In fact, we have already gone further – by refining some proposals and objectives, strengthening some, adding further proposals, and – as proposed by the TPTT – referring some complex issues to task teams for further interrogation and investigation. Attention will be given to the implementation of these proposals speedily, including those cases where further campus debate is necessary, as has been agreed upon, inter alia with Senate.

I wish to thank the TPTT – its convenors, dr Moraka and prof Verschoor, as well as its ‘bright young minds’, a diverse and energetic bunch – for all their hard work in compiling their report and plan. It was a key contribution to this fourth phase of transformation of the UFS.

One of the key TPTT recommendations was to complete the social contract process as soon as possible. We have listened to them: this task has been completed in the past few months.

2.4 The draft Social Contract or ‘Institutional Charter’

Process background

Today we can release a first draft of this “social contract”, or what is now provisionally called a draft “Institutional Charter”, for campus-wide discussion and comment.

As noted above, the Social Contract process, using the metaphor of a ‘promised land’, was launched in 2004. (It was complemented by various Diversity Sensitization Workshops arranged by the Office of Diversity.) Through this intense and participative process, hundreds of staff and students gave their input relating to the basic values, principles and behaviours that should govern and inform human relations and transformation at the University of the Free State.

The draft ‘social contract’ or Institutional Charter was generated from all these inputs as well as the deliberations of the Executive Committee of Executive Management and the Executive Management.

At its bosberaad held last month the Executive Management unanimously adopted the first draft of the social contract or Institutional Charter – not as a final document, but as one reflecting sufficient consensus for it to be released for further discussion by the campus.

It was agreed that the Charter has all the potential to be a breakthrough and milestone document, since it provides essential guidelines and parameters for directing and energizing all further transformation.

Sentiments expressed by a diverse group of management members and participants, including representatives of labour unions and our three campus SRC presidents, indicated a significant convergence of thinking. It also indicated appreciation for (and even surprise due to) the commitment of the Management to transformation, and to a thorough and well-considered, high-impact and “deep” transformation process.

Key questions

The key questions behind the social contract process were:

How do we ensure that we transform in the best possible and most effective way? What principles should underpin excellence in transformation?
Towards what kind of university do we want to transform? What must be the nature or character of the post-redress, normalised university?
Which values and principles must guide our institutional and individual behaviour (within the context of, and guided by, the South African Constitution and its Bill of Rights)?
How do we create a university which conforms to our ideals of a place where everybody can feel at home, find a place, find space to grow?
How do we reconcile the different fears, aspirations, frustrations and expectations of our members?
What does being a high quality, equitable, non-racial, non-sexist, multicultural and multilingual university really entail?

These questions must be seen within the broader context of building the new South Africa, of nation building - given our complex, painful history and the legacies of poverty, underdevelopment, colonialism and apartheid.

Allow me to briefly take you through this draft Institutional Charter.

The Preamble

The Preamble affirms and commits the University to upholding the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa and its Bill of Rights, especially as realised within the institutional context of a university.

The Declaration of Commitments

The preamble is followed by a number of important commitments and acknowledgements.

First, the recognition of those who have worked to build and develop our University since its inception in 1904: from a very small university, serving a poor, marginalized community under a colonial government, to a large and respected, high-quality university serving more than 25000 students from diverse communities and economic backgrounds.

But, then the acknowledgement that our country’s history has divided the peoples of South Africa and marginalized black people and women (and people with disabilities) from job and developmental opportunities, also within the higher education sector and at this University.

The Charter recognizes that in its recent history the University has committed itself to transformation and redirected itself to serving all communities, in particular by opening its doors to all races, through access programmes and the introduction of a progressive parallel-medium language policy (as well as other transformation steps).

Then follows a very important statement regarding diversity:

“We value, affirm and commit ourselves to embrace and celebrate the rich diversity of South Africa’s peoples within the central region, a diversity that manifests itself in language, culture, religion, social and economic status, sexual orientation and nationality, among others.”

The charter commits the university to meeting the challenges of a transforming society and a transforming higher education institution in a developing society, in particular the challenges of nation-building, reconciliation, redress, non-racialism and non-sexism – and ultimately normalisation – within a high-quality academic institution.

The charter also commits the university to strengthening the core competencies and capabilities of this University as an institution of higher learning, striving to ensure a robust and sustainable university for current and future generations.

The draft Charter importantly also echoes the sentiments of the SA Constitution regarding the acknowledgement of the sovereign authority and guidance of God in these matters. (“May God protect our people.”)

A phased view of transformation

In a key section, the Charter set outs a particular approach to good and successful transformation at the institutional level. This reflects a two-phase view of best-practice transformation.

The Charter highlights that our institution currently is in a redress phase of transformation in which we seek to overcome the burden of our past and its various histories, and in which we seek to address particular inequities of this past.

It recognises the complexity of our current efforts in this redress phase, given numerous societal demands on universities, as well as the presence of polarities, contradictions and conflicting forces and objectives.

Examples are: Whilst multilingualism opens access to students and serves them well, it appears to limit access of staff. Employment equity is essential, but how do we harmonize it with diversity and multilingualism – and with providing a career for the best young white and black staff in a non-racial setting? Is there some optimum diversity mix if one wants to maximize the benefits of diversity, or promote non-racialism, at a place of higher learning?

The draft Charter says that we recognize that these have to be managed and brought into a state of balance and be harmonized if we are to produce, when the redress phase comes to an end, a ‘first promised land’ for all – black and white, female and male, and so forth

We see this intermediate outcome – the first promised land - as displaying the structural conditions for an institutional ‘space’ within which both fears and aspirations/expectations are moderated, within which conflict between objectives can be moderated, and which is characterized by a principled balance and symmetry between competing objectives, forces, interests and interest groups.

It is likely that such structural conditions will include approximate balance in the composition of staff and students.

We intend this intermediate goal – the ‘first promised land’ – to provide a nurturing and fertile environmentfor proceeding to the ‘final/eventual promised land’. This would be a normalised university community characterised by truly non-racial, non-sexist and non-discriminatory paradigms and behaviours amongst all the people of the University – where old paradigms, divisions, pains, conflicts and tensions will be transcended, and where race and gender have ceased to be decisive factors in determining behaviour, attitudes and thinking. In short: a high quality, equitable, non-racial, non-sexist, multicultural and multilingual university which has been normalised.

Aim of the Charter

The introduction of the concept of a (first) promised land derives from a belief that, by providing a framework and vision of what kind of future university we are transforming towards, the dynamics of the transformation process will be better aligned towards energetic, well-directed and principled transformation rather than getting impeded by counter-productive cross-currents.

We will get both better and faster transformation.

What the Charter then does – in addition to describing overarching values espoused by the institution and its people – is to describe the outlines and constitutive principles of the ‘first promised land’, as well as the parameters for the process of moving successfully towards this goal.

However, clearly the values and many of the principles and parameters are equally constitutive and important for the ultimate phase of transformation towards a normalised university community.

Seen together, the values and constitutive principles are intended to provide an incubating environment within which the redress phase can be completed and, even more important, within which the future UFS can be constituted, first in the intermediate term (‘first promised land’) and later in the long term (‘eventual promised land’).

Statement of Values

A next section of the Charter reflects the remarkably wide consensus by social contract workshop participants on the values that they espouse, also for the workplace. Most of these can be incorporated under the existing official Values of the Universities – although I foresee a robust campus debate on the inclusion of additional values, as well as the more detailed specification of these values. It suffices to mention but a few:

4.1 Academic freedom and autonomy

This is about promoting critical scientific inquiry and freedom of thought, respecting the right of all to freedom of speech, and fostering a culture of open, responsible debate and critical discourse.

4.2 Excellence and quality

Examples:

Pursue scholarly quality in all aspects of the academic enterprise.

Practise the highest professional standards in both academe and support services.

Nurture innovation, new ideas and a spirit of initiative.

4.3 Fairness

This is about justice and equity in all aspects and activities of our institution, and also contributing as a university to social justice and equity in society at large

It is about opposing and eliminating any discriminatory practices based on race or gender or religion or sexual preference, as well as other forms of unfair discrimination.

4.4 Service

Establish and energetically project a service culture within the context of an academic institution.

Comply with our responsibility to produce graduates that are well-rounded and intellectually developed and skilled as workers and critical citizens.

Care for others in a spirit of humanness and botho/ubuntu.

4.5 Integrity

Practise the highest professional and ethical standards and personal and professional integrity in our work and dealings with others.

Respect oneself and show mutual respect for others

Establish a culture of fellowship and mutual tolerance.

Respect for public law and common law in all their subdivisions.

Using university resources effectively, efficiently and frugally in a spirit of stewardship and sustainability.

These values may seem non-controversial (mother’s milk and apple pie) – but in the context of a very diverse and multicultural institution in the midst of a redress phase, they constitute a very important common ground and basis for unity, reconciliation and mutual embracement of a joint future.

Constitutive Principles of a high quality, equitable, non-racial and non-sexist University

Like a Constitution of a State, but adapted to the university environment, this section seeks to specify foundational, constitutive principles and parameters –perhaps building blocks? – of our future university. These are intended to give a clear sense of direction – and a sense of being directed by principled parameters – to activities at the University.

A first category of constitutive principles relates to the most foundational of all, i.e. the intrinsic nature of the University:

Maintaining the intrinsic nature of the University as a place of science and scholarship, amidst continual change and adaptation to new circumstances and challenge.
At all times accepting the centrality of critical scientific inquiry as the foundation of science and scholarship and the leitmotiv that shapes typical, core university functions, tasks and work.
Safeguarding academic freedom and institutional autonomy as the foundation of critical inquiry and scholarship.
Implementing the core tasks of the university – which are teaching/learning and research comprising both (a) basic knowledge and knowledge-creation and (b) applied, career-oriented and engaged science; which includes (c) engagement with the developmental problems of communities (i.e. integrated community service founded in scholarship).
Acknowledging that the intrinsic nature of the university requires all teaching-learning, research and community service to be scholarly and scholarship-based.
Recognising that sustainability as a robust university requires an ingrained habit of renewal built on critical self-reflection.

A second group of principles relate to the foundations of our academic culture, quality and excellence:

A positive connection between teaching and research, with quality in academic work requiring a balance and mutual enrichment between both areas.
Quality through diversity of disciplines, approaches and people.
Quality through innovation and continuous improvement.
Engagement with the problems of South Africa and Africa.
Equity, justice and fairness in academic activities.

A third, and very important group, relates to diversity and the social context within the institution:

Equity, justice and fairness in dealing with diversity.
Innovation in the pursuit of equity and justice.
Creating space and a sense of belonging for all members of the university – black and white, male and female, of whatever language, cultural or economic background, as well as people with disabilities.
Sufficient diversity of symbols and artefacts to reflect the diversity of histories and cultures unambiguously and in a balanced, respectful manner.
Substantive and sufficient multilingualism (in terms of the main and other languages) in academic and support activities.
Substantive multiculturalism and embracement of the diversity of cultures.
Non-dominance amongst diversity, i.e. preventing the dominance of any group over others.
Non-marginalisation and respect for minorities.
Balance between competing interests and conflicting objectives by explicitly and innovatively pursuing the difficult trade-offs that may be necessary.
Sufficient diversity in the composition of academic and support staff and students to constitute the necessary institutional space for nurturing non-racialism, non-sexism, multiculturalism, multilingualism and non-dominance.
Sufficient diversity of staff in terms of professional language skills to meet the operational needs of multilingual teaching in the main languages.

A next group relate to the work environment, for example:

A rewarding work environment and relevant career opportunities in order to be an employer of preference for the best staff: black and white, female and male, of whatever working age.
The thousands of matriculants, black and white, who apply to study here, want to study at a good university, and a good university wants to attract the best black and white students and the best black and white staff, male and female.
Embracing multilingualism by empowering all our members to function, albeit perhaps at different levels, in both main languages of the University; in addition, empowering all staff and students to be at least functionally skilled in Sesotho.

Relating to student life, the charter has provisional principles such as:

Upholding the highest standards of learning, academic excellence, scholarship and critical inquiry, and an all-pervasive academic culture.
Embracing the rich diversity of student life at the UFS in terms of race, gender, language, religion, nationality etc – and maintaining sufficient diversity in the student body (for both city and residential students).
A positive and supportive environment and platform for dynamic student life which is based on an educational approach towards student activities.
Others could be contemplated, e.g. Fostering a culture of service and community engagement in the academic sphere and in other spheres of student life. (I am sure the students will add to this list.)

Relating to governance and management:

Substantive presence of different population groups in governance, management and decision-making bodies.
Functioning in a non-bureaucratic and non-authoritarian manner in all the operations of the university.
Decision-making based on transparency, inclusivity and participation, and following open and non-dominating communication and discourse.
A co-operative, trustful and respectful relationship between labour unions and management in the common interest of the institution and all its staff members and students.

Another one to consider is:

Abiding by the highest international norms and standards regarding corporate governance.

This is the essence of what we are calling our draft Institutional Charter. I believe it is a major breakthrough in the transformation discourse on this campus as it attempts to clarify our thinking on some very complex issues.

In so doing it seeks to build consensus and provide some clarity and a sense of ease about the future we want to create and the path we must follow to get there.

Concluding remarks on the Charter

As noted above, we suspect that the Institutional Charter, once finalised, will come to play and increasingly important role in directing the transformation and academic discourse on this campus.

We commit ourselves to institute the necessary implementation plans and operational processes, appropriately prioritised, to enable the UFS to move briskly and assuredly on the road of transformation – in its broadest sense – towards our intermediate institutional goal (the ‘first promised land’) within the parameters and guidelines provided by this Charter.

We also suspect – and indeed hope – that the Charter will encourage staff and students to seriously engage intellectually with the complex issues brought to mind by the Charter, as befits a good university. Many specifics will have to be agreed upon and a difficult course negotiated. Such critical discourse is important for this University. It is important for this country.

I want to appeal today to all members of the University community to look beyond the stresses and strains of our current situation and imagine a future where we can all feel at home. Our Charter is an attempt to visualise this future and we must all be part of building it.

This Charter also states that we unambiguously stand for attaining and maintaining diversity – sufficient and substantive diversity – because it makes us a better university, an equitable university, and innovative university, and an engaged university – and because diversity is and must remain a source of strength and robustness.

3. Conclusion: 2 February and a Plea from Africa (and from the University of the Free State)

Looking back over the last number of years, one can see a process of progressive unfolding and unpacking of our concept of transformation, of the dimensions of transformation, of the dynamics and phases of transformation - and of what constitutes (good or best?) transformation. This is the task we have set ourselves in 2003. This is the task we must continue with. Together.

Today is the 2nd of February 2007. The date of 2 February has a particular significance in our recent history. It will always be remembered for the announcement, in 1990, of the unbanning of political organisations and the release of Nelson Mandela from prison, and a range of steps that would lead to a new Constitution and a new democratic dispensation and election. Without in any way suggesting a similar level of importance of today, I would want us to contemplate the issues and announcements of today, and in particular the release of the draft Institutional Charter, in the context of our historic duty to apply our minds and energy to building this institution, this society, this nation, this country – in a constructive, principled, balanced and inclusive manner.

It want us to turn our thoughts now to one of the most symbolic and moving pieces of music ever to come out of this country and this continent. It is the song, Plea from Africa, written by John Knox Bokwe more than a hundred years ago. It expresses the yearning of peoples in Africa under colonial oppression and exploitation, the yearning for a new future, for a promised land. Let us listen quietly to this prayer:

PLEA FROM AFRICA

Give a thought to Africa! ‘neath the burning Sun

There are hosts of weary hearts, waiting to be won

Many lives have passed away; and in many homes

There are voices crying now, to the living God.

Chorus:

Tell the love of Jesus

By her hills and waters

God bless Africa

And her sons and daughters

Breathe a pray’r for Africa! God the Father’s love

Can reach down and bless all hearts, from His heav’n above

And when lips are moved by grace they so sweetly sing

Pray for peace in Africa from our loving God

Chorus:

Tell the love of Jesus

By her hills and waters

God bless Africa

And her sons and daughters

J.K. Bokwe (1855-1922)

Let us all – the diverse daughters and sons of Africa in this beloved country and at this well-loved university – take hands to build a new future, based on a principled approach to scholarly quality and based on a rich diversity – a new future for all at this university.

Let us fortify our foundations for a great and robust, ever-changing university of excellence, equity, engagement and innovation.

May God bless this process, this institution, this province, this country.

Modimo o hlohonolofatse yunivesithi ena.

Nkosi Sikelel’ iAfrika.

Khotso Pula Nala

In Deo Sapientiae Lux.

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

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