Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
13 May 2021 | Story Dr Bright Nkrumah | Photo Supplied
Dr Bright Nkrumah, Free State Centre for Human Rights, University of the Free State (UFS)

The year 2021 marks the 58th anniversary of the establishment of the Organisation of African Union (OAU) on 25 May 1963. The month of May is therefore celebrated annually as Africa Month. This piece, in essence, is a craving to respond to an often-articulated question: is Africa Month a moment of celebration or introspection? The former would have been preferred had the various freedoms offered by the organisation been more realistic and dealt with the concrete challenges bedevilling the continent’s population. 

At the onset, it ought to be acknowledged that the organisation was not forged with the intent of improving the living conditions of its population but to safeguard the recently won independence and sovereignty of its member states. Against this backdrop, the notion of non-interference in the domestic affairs (Uti Possidetis Juris) of states became its guiding principle, thereby fostering a culture of silence on abuses perpetuate by African rulers against their citizens.  Having said that there were notable illustrations of leaders such as Julius Nyerere, Kenneth Kaunda, and Samora Machel, who individually and collectively ‘invoked the notion of humanitarian intervention’ and waged crusades to relieve Ugandans from the jaws of Idi Amin. 

Indeed, one of the significant achievements of the OAU during this era was the adoption of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Charter) in 1981. The instrument may be seen as a trumpeting of freedom, as it considers the rights and wellbeing of Africans sacrosanct and uncompromising. It is important and perhaps enthralling that all African states are parties to the Charter. While the large-scale ratification could enhance its moral force, it could also be used as a red herring to cover up various atrocities in hostile countries.

Where are we?

In 2002, African rulers meeting in Durban, South Africa, adopted the Constitutive Act, transforming the OAU into the African Union (AU). The new Act perhaps seems to be breathing fresh air into Africa’s rights struggle. In stark contrast to its forerunner, the Constitutive Act authorises the AU to intervene in a situation where citizens are threatened by grave danger perpetrated by their governments or external forces. Remarkably, article 3(k) calls for raising the ‘living standards of African people’. Going by these aspirations, one might speculate that Africans are in for a cheery and jolly ride.

Remarkably, while the Act addresses several aspects of the continent’s socioeconomic issues its operationalisation remains the captive of competing for national interests of AU states. Four key setbacks merit consideration here.

Instability: The landscape of Africa is punctuated by rulers’ embezzlement of public funds, ethnic privilege, and siphoning resources to one’s home village to the detriment of others. This bias tends to incite discontent and hostilities, even as one of the popular rhetoric of the infamous Boko Haram is to addressing Nigeria’s North-South resource disparity. By the same reckoning, hundreds of women and children have been displaced or killed from avoidable hostilities in geographical enclaves such as Cameroon, DR Congo, Mozambique, and Sudan.

Injustice: State security agencies and specifically the police force have evolved to be intimidators rather than the protective machinery they ought to be. More disturbingly, access to justice seems to be a pipe dream, as legal fees and prolonged trials make it burdensome for victims to seek remedies. As a common practice, many judicial systems across Anglophone, Francophone, and Lusophone countries are still modelled on ancient colonial systems, with lawyers and judges using convoluted legal jargon which frustrates rather than assists victims of abuse. 

Poverty: 40% of the continent’s population lives in extreme poverty or on <$1 (approx. R14) per day. Indeed, this figure is sobering. A reader might agree that the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (Nepad) may be seen as the primary document for reversing this trend. The document has, however, been criticised as given superficial treatment to the basic entitlement of vulnerable groups, and without feasible strategies on issues of underdevelopment.  It speaks to enhancing greater access to services, but segregates this aspiration from how the impoverished could access these essentials. Without a commitment to enforceable socioeconomic goods, such as health care, education, food, social security, the document may be seen as placing a stamp on the skewed access to resources already pervasive in local communities.

Covid-19: The onset of the pandemic calls for total marshalling of the continent’s fiscal and human resources. Sadly, the virus has claimed the lives of eminent cadres, teachers, and trade unionists who could have played a key role in this regard. South Africa alone has recorded more than 54,620 deaths, leaving behind hundreds of orphans.   Still, the ramifications are likely to be more significant, altering the structures of society and putting a strain on the financial resources of weak states. 

What ought to be done?

One golden thread running through these challenges is the weakness of the AU to forge effective institutions to restrain the excesses of states, monitor the government’s compliance with human rights obligations, and accountability. If the organisation seeks to improve human rights in Africa, it ought to revive debates towards Pan-Africanism and regional integration. At present, artificial borders erected by colonisers have created states which are simply not viable economic and political units. To this end, continental integration is the effective means of accelerating economic growth, uplifting the least developed countries, and domestically-based transformative development.

Opinion article by Dr Bright Nkrumah, Free State Centre for Human Rights, Faculty of Law, University of the Free State.

 


News Archive

A bridge to the future for school leavers
2009-03-04

 
Ms Merridy Wilson-Strydom, Research Consultant at the Centre for Higher Education Studies and Development at the UFS. 
 Photo: Supplied)

Thousands of learners in the country’s high schools fail to qualify for post-school education and training. Now a unique project funded by the Ford Foundation and being piloted at the University of the Free State (UFS) seeks to provide such learners with a lifeline.

The 2008 Grade 12 results showed once again that the schooling system is – and has been for a long time – in the throes of a severe crisis. The most disturbing feature of this crisis is that the system does not produce learners with the required level of literacy, numeracy and other cognitive skills to further their education or to become part of the country’s workforce.

Clearly this situation is untenable in a developing country such as ours, facing the immense challenges of a severe skills shortage, poverty and unemployment. We cannot afford to have hundreds of thousands of young people walking the streets without any prospect of a decent living and a future of opportunity.

The UFS and partners in the Free State Higher Education Consortium (FSHEC) have devised a unique programme to help underprepared and even unprepared school-leavers who have fallen through the cracks of the school system.

“We are hoping to make a meaningful contribution to the challenging field of creating educational opportunities for post-school study and the world of work through the generous support of the Ford Foundation,” says Ms Merridy Wilson-Strydom, Research Consultant at the Centre for Higher Education Studies and Development at the UFS.

“The Skills for a Changing World Programme is specifically aimed at removing barriers to educational opportunities for school-leavers who are not able to access higher education – mainstream or extended degrees. At the moment there are few, if any, meaningful opportunities for those learners who come through the school system un/underprepared,” she says.

The primary target group for the NQF Level-5 Programme is young people between the ages of 18 and 25 who are currently excluded from post-schooling educational opportunities. The duration of the programme is one year.

According to Ms Wilson-Strydom, the core modules of the activity-driven curriculum are English Literacy and Language Development, Mathematical Literacy, Information and Communication Technology and Your Global Positioning System (YGPS), which focuses on study skills and critical life skills, e.g. dealing with diversity. Students will also be supported to make informed choices about their future study or career directions.

“The development of the core-module materials is almost complete and from the second semester we plan to test the programme by means of a pilot project, which will be conducted on the UFS’s South Campus in Bloemfontein,” says Ms Wilson-Strydom.

“The pilot study will involve a group of 20-50 learners who have finished Grade 12 but do not qualify for the UFS bridging programme known as the Career Preparation Programme or any other higher-education programmes,” says Ms Wilson-Strydom.

Although not yet accredited, the project team aims to have the programme accredited as a Higher Certificate and is also exploring the possibility of registering the programme as a Short Learning Programme.

“One of the challenges with access and bridging programmes in the country is that students do not obtain a formal qualification for their bridging year. Hence those who do not continue with higher-education study (or cannot continue for various reasons such as finances), do not gain the recognition they should get for what they have learnt during their bridging year.”

“Our focus on developing the Skills for a Changing World Programme as a qualification in its own right is a key innovation in the current education and training landscape,” says Ms Wilson-Strydom.

Media Release
Issued by: Lacea Loader
Assistant Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl.stg@ufs.ac.za  
4 March 2009
 

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