Latest News Archive

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

Confronting collective inactivity to safeguard our freedom

27 April 2021 | Story Prof Sethulego Matebesi | Photo Sonia Small

Prof Matabesi — Prof Sethulego Matebesi is a Senior Lecturer and Academic Head of the Department of Sociology at the University of the Free State.

This year’s Freedom Day marks an important milestone in the history of South Africa. It will be 27 years since the first non-racial elections were held in the country, a figure that equals the number of years Nelson Mandela spent in prison.

If equating Mandela with the freedom we enjoy today is not already disingenuous enough, we sunk even lower by assuming that we are close to achieving the civil liberties he embodied. You do not have to go further than read the daily media headlines to understand the extent of the onslaught on the pillars of democracy. That this onslaught comes from political leaders is one of the main reasons why most South Africans are disillusioned with politics, democracy and social issues.

Anarchy wreaking havoc in weak societies

Sociology taught me about the relevance of institutions to a social structure: they control human conduct by setting up predefined behaviour patterns. For example, throughout history anarchy has wreaked havoc in settings where organisations are weak, fragmented, and the citizenry is inactive. Similarly, while peace, unity, and the preservation and the restoration of human dignity are the hallmarks of Freedom Day celebrations, we have become a nation increasingly influenced by symbolic politics and the politics of offence.

It would be hard to find a better example of a significant threat to the pillars of democracy than the widespread onslaught on the judiciary. At the heart of the broader political, legal, and moral issues confronting SA today is how the right of all to equal respect and equal protection under the law has been compromised. Casting doubt about the independence of the judiciary conceals the motivations that most endanger the principles of freedom and equality.

My stance is not aimed at muting the expression of unpopular opinions – a basic tenet of democracy. However, we need to be mindful of events that have and will become powerfully symbolic in altering the nation’s social fabric.

Freedom under attack by populist politics

Any societal change requires some form of flexibility. No doubt, the first decade of democracy was accompanied by hope and the euphoria of the Rainbow Nation. This period demonstrated how different racial groups could live together in harmony, play together, and attend the same school without being required to forsake values they hold dear. This period was punctured by notions of active citizenship and the promotion of democratic cooperation that is based on the acceptance of universal human rights and the rule of law and values of diversity.

While millions of people elsewhere in the world have been forced to flee hunger, war, terrorism, and emboldened autocrats in their countries of birth, the euphoric wave of the Mandela years has, unwittingly and dramatically, worn off during the past decade in South Africa. This turn of events is linked to populist politics that seriously compromise democratic institutions in the country.

In my opinion, there are no heroes in situations like these.

In a country characterised by rampant corruption, violent crime, gender-based violence, human trafficking, racial intolerance, and teenage drug abuse, are politicians the only ones to be blamed for the threats to democracy?

Conquering immorality and safeguarding our freedom

Despite all the challenges we face as a country, we remain a remarkably resilient nation, as is widely acknowledged. This resilience is echoed by how we have navigated our way around a highly divisive and intolerant society to embrace and celebrate our rich and vibrant cultural heritage.

Nevertheless, we have become complacent. We have been vocal against any narrative aimed at restricting our legal, religious, human, civil, economic and political rights. Yet, partly due to our collective inaction, we have failed to use the means to provide a compelling counter-narrative of resistance to the manipulation of state institutions and broader immorality permeating society. This inaction affects the lives and livelihoods of millions of those who do not have the organisational capacity and means to advocate for the causes that affect them.

Let us use this year’s historic Freedom Day celebrations to demonstrate our firm resolve to protect the critical pillars of democracy from further exploitation. This kind of collective responsibility is what South Africa has always been about. Only when our government at all levels, the private sector, and concerned citizens across the country begin a critical partnership and commitment to maintain our democratic institutions and processes that our past losses as a nation become gains and defeats become triumphs.

* Prof Sethulego Matebesi works on all current affairs such as political and social issues. More specifically, he focuses on social movements and protests, community-mining company conflict, and local municipal governance.

News Archive

MBA Programme - Question And Answer Sheet - 27 May 2004

2004-05-27

1. WHAT MUST THE UNIVERSITY OF THE FREE STATE (UFS) DO TO GET FULL ACCREDITATION FOR THE MBA PROGRAMMES?

According to the Council on Higher Education’s (CHE) evaluation, the three MBA programmes of the UFS clearly and significantly contribute to students’ knowledge and skills, are relevant for the workplace, are appropriately resourced and have an appropriate internal and external programme environment. These programmes are the MBA General, the MBA in Health Care Management and the MBA in Entrepreneurship.

What the Council on Higher Education did find, was a few technical and administrative issues that need to be addressed.

This is why the three MBA programmes of the UFS received conditional accreditation – which in itself is a major achievement for the UFS’s School of Management, which was only four years old at the time of the evaluation.

The following breakdown gives one a sense of the mostly administrative nature of the conditions that have to be met before full accreditation is granted by the CHE:

a. A formal forum of stakeholders: The UFS is required to establish a more structured, inclusive process of review of its MBA programmes. This is an administrative formality already in process.

b. A work allocation model: According to the CHE this is required to regulate the workload of the teaching staff, particularly as student numbers grow, rather than via standard management processes as currently done.

c. Contractual agreements with part-time staff: The UFS is required to enter into formal agreements with part-time and contractual staff as all agreements are currently done on an informal and claim-basis. This is an administrative formality already in process.

d. A formal curriculum committee: According to the CHE, the School of Management had realised the need for a structure – other than the current Faculty Board - where all MBA lecturers can deliberate on the MBA programmes, and serve as a channel for faculty input, consultation and decision-making.

e. A system of external moderators: This need was already identified by the UFS and the system is to be implemented as early as July 2004.

f. A compulsory research component: The UFS is required to introduce a research component which will include the development of research skills for the business environment. The UFS management identified this need and has approved such a component - it is to take effect from January 2005. This is an insufficient element lacking in virtually all MBA programmes in South Africa.

g. Support programmes for learners having problems with numeracy: The UFS identified this as a need for academic support among some learners and has already developed such a programme which will be implemented from January 2005.

The majority of these conditions have been satisfied already and few remaining steps will take effect soon. It is for this reason that the UFS is confident that its three MBA programmes will soon receive full accreditation.

2. WHAT ACCREDITATION DOES THE UFS HAVE FOR ITS MBA PROGRAMME?

The UFS’s School of Management received conditional accreditation for its three MBA programmes.

Two levels of accreditation are awarded to tertiary institutions for their MBA programmes, namely full accreditation and conditional accreditation. When a programme does not comply with the minimum requirements regarding a small number of criteria, conditional accreditation is given. This can be rectified during the short or medium term.

3. IS THERE ANYTHING WRONG WITH THE ACADEMIC CORE OF THE UFS’s MBA PROGRAMMES?

No. The UFS is proud of its three MBA programmes’ reputation in the market and the positive feedback it receives from graduandi and their employers.

The MBA programmes of the UFS meet most of the minimum requirements of the evaluation process.

In particular, the key element of ‘teaching and learning’, which relates to the curriculum and content of the MBA programmes, is beyond question. In other words, the core of what is being taught in our MBA programmes is sound.

4. IS THE UFS’s MBA A WORTHWHILE QUALIFICATION?

Yes. Earlier this year, the School of Management – young as it is - was rated by employers as the best smaller business school in South Africa. This was based on a survey conducted by the Professional Management Review and reported in the Sunday Times Business Times, of 25 January 2004.

The UFS is committed to maintaining these high standards of quality, not only through compliance with the requirements of the CHE, but also through implementing its own quality assurance measures.

Another way in which we benchmark the quality of our MBA programmes is through the partnerships we have formed with institutions such as the DePaul University in Chicago and Kansas State University, both in the US, as well as the Robert Schuman University in France.

For this reason the UFS appreciates and supports the work of the CHE and welcomes its specific findings regarding the three MBA programmes.

It is understandable that the MBA review has caused some nervousness – not least among current MBA students throughout the country.

However, one principle that the UFS management is committed to is this: preparing all our students for a world of challenge and change. Without any doubt the MBA programme of the UFS is a solid preparation.

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