Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
08 July 2021 | Story Rulanzen Martin | Photo Supplied
For Prof Anthea van Jaarsveld, the balance between science, theoretical and practical experience is important for a balanced industry.

Her unique approach to Drama and Theatre Arts makes Prof Anthea van Jaarsveld the most suitable person to take over the reins as Head of the UFS Department of Drama and Theatre Arts. Prof Van Jaarsveld was officially appointed as head of this special department this year. 

The Department of Drama at the UFS is one of the biggest in the country, and according to Prof Van Jaarsveld it is also the best, because the department produces some of the finest in the industry. Her main goal as head of department is to bring about a subtle change in emphasis that will ultimately make a real contribution to employability, a greater variety of job opportunities, and practice-orientated research. “My ultimate goal is therefore an approach within which academy and practice will find each other for the benefit of both,” says Prof Van Jaarsveld.

Science, theatre and drama collide 

Prof Van Jaarsveld has a scientific approach to drama and theatre arts. She never acted professionally. It is precisely from a scientific perspective that her knowledge of the theorising and contextualisation of drama text, theatre concepts, and the film industry is applied in order to maintain a balance in a profession where the emphasis on practical experience is overwhelming.  

She studied Drama at the UFS and was also employed as Drama teacher at Eunice Girls’ School. Following this, she started working as lecturer in the Department of Afrikaans and Dutch. “There I focused on the Drama genre in Afrikaans; therefore, I never actually left drama and theatre,” says Prof Van Jaarsveld. In 2018, she returned to the Department of Drama. 

Upon her return to the department where she started her studies, her aim is to ensure that the department again complies with the total package of the UFS and to make sure “that our students are prepared for a multifaceted and dynamic industry on a practical level”. 

Prof Van Jaarsveld took over from Prof Nico Luwes who retired in 2019. 

News Archive

The failure of the law
2004-06-04

 

Written by Lacea Loader

- Call for the protection of consumers’ and tax payers rights against corporate companies

An expert in commercial law has called for reforms to the Companies Act to protect the rights of consumers and investors.

“Consumers and tax payers are lulled into thinking the law protects them when it definitely does not,” said Prof Dines Gihwala this week during his inaugural lecture at the University of the Free State’s (UFS).

Prof Gihwala, vice-chairperson of the UFS Council, was inaugurated as extraordinary professor in commercial law at the UFS’s Faculty of Law.

He said that consumers, tax payers and shareholders think they can look to the law for an effective curb on the enormous power for ill that big business wields.

“Once the public is involved, the activities of big business must be controlled and regulated. It is the responsibility of the law to oversee and supervise such control and regulation,” said Prof Gihwala.

He said that, when undesirable consequences occur despite laws enacted specifically to prevent such results, it must be fair to suggest that the law has failed.

“The actual perpetrators of the undesirable behaviour seldom pay for it in any sense, not even when criminal conduct is involved. If directors of companies are criminally charged and convicted, the penalty is invariably a fine imposed on the company. So, ironically, it is the money of tax payers that is spent on investigating criminal conduct, formulating charges and ultimately prosecuting the culprits involved in corporate malpractice,” said Prof Gihwala.

According to Prof Gihwala the law continuously fails to hold companies meaningfully accountable to good and honest business values.

“Insider trading is a crime and, although legislation was introduced in 1998 to curb it, not a single successful criminal prosecution has taken place. While the law appears to be offering the public protection against unacceptable business behaviour, it does no such thing – the law cannot act as a deterrent if it is inadequate or not being enforced,” he said.

The government believed it was important to facilitate access to the country’s economic resources by those who had been denied it in the past. The Broad Based Economic Empowerment Act of 2003 (BBEE), is legislation to do just that. “We should be asking ourselves whether it is really possible for an individual, handicapped by the inequities of the past, to compete in the real business world even though the BBEE Act is now part of the law?,” said Prof Gihwala.

Prof Gihwala said that judges prefer to follow precedent instead of taking bold initiative. “Following precedent is safe at a personal level. To do so will elicit no outcry of disapproval and one’s professional reputation is protected. The law needs to evolve and it is the responsibility of the judiciary to see that it happens in an orderly fashion. Courts often take the easy way out, and when the opportunity to be bold and creative presents itself, it is ignored,” he said.

“Perhaps we are expecting too much from the courts. If changes are to be made to the level of protection to the investing public by the law, Parliament must play its proper role. It is desirable for Parliament to be proactive. Those tasked with the responsibility of rewriting our Companies Act should be bold and imaginative. They should remove once and for all those parts of our common law which frustrate the ideals of our Constitution, and in particular those which conflict with the principles of the BBEE Act,” said Prof Gihwala.

According to Prof Gihwala, the following reforms are necessary:

• establishing a unit that is part of the office of the Registrar of Companies to bolster a whole inspectorate in regard to companies’ affairs;
• companies who are liable to pay a fine or fines, should have the right to take action to recover that fine from those responsible for the conduct;
• and serious transgression of the law should allow for imprisonment only – there should be no room for the payment of fines.
 

Prof Gihwala ended the lecture by saying: “If the opportunity to re-work the Companies Act is not grabbed with both hands, we will witness yet another failure in the law. Even more people will come to believe that the law is stupid and that it has made fools of them. And that would be the worst possible news in our developing democracy, where we are struggling to ensure that the Rule of Law prevails and that every one of us has respect for the law”.

 

 

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