Latest News Archive

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

Opinion: The final push towards Elections 2021

28 October 2021 | Story Prof Sethulego Matebesi | Photo Sonia Small (Kaleidoscope Studios)

Dr Sethulego Matebesi — Prof Sethulego Matebesi is an Associate Professor and Head of the Department of Sociology at the University of the Free State (UFS)

Opinion article by Prof Sethulego Matebesi, Associate Professor and Head of Department of Sociology, University of the Free State.

When a catastrophic accident cuts the first manned mission to Jupiter’s moons short in the Astronaut: The Last Push a 2012 American science fiction film – Michael Forrest, the sole remaining astronaut, must endure the three-year return trip to Earth alone. Similarly, how will the next five-year journey of local governance in South Africa manifest itself? Again, I reckon the responses from citizens will vary widely: from widespread cynicism to hope for a better future and from distrust of a dysfunctional system to the belief that service delivery will improve.

In an all-too-familiar scenario, political party campaigns have been littered with promises of how they best represent and advance voters’ interests. In doing so, two helpful facts about these campaigns emerge. The first is that the ANC, DA, EFF, and FF+ have realised that local contexts differ significantly and have framed their messages accordingly. A cursory glance at the broadcastings of these customised campaigns reveals that they aim to provide a safe psychological outlet for community-level concerns. The second is that, in general, the election messaging and adverts of the ANC ranged from apologies to bold statements about who wields power to change the face of local governance. Opposition parties focused on improving the local government system notoriously known for the disregard of citizens’ needs and providing an active voice for the voiceless.

And guess what?

Political parties and candidates may mobilise constituencies as much as they can. However, the next five years of local governance require a significant departure from its status of dysfunctionality to a competent, legitimate political institution that produces satisfactory political outcomes. This legislative and moral mandate depends entirely on local participation in elections.

The three dimensions of increasing voter participation

Better and more meaningful political participation in elections remains a concern in South Africa. In a report for the Ford Foundation, Hahrie Han, a political science professor at the University of California, proposes a framework that details increasing participation and making it more meaningful.

Firstly, people must be able to participate. Declaring election day as a public holiday, President Cyril Ramaphosa removed an important barrier to participation. While some may believe that election day will be just another public holiday, for others – particularly those who are working – there is no need to weigh up whether to take leave for a cause that will not significantly change their lives. Furthermore, the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) has demonstrated a sense of moral urgency by drawing unprecedented public attention to their voting processes and procedures to protect voters and election officials from spreading the virus at the polling stations.

Secondly, people must want to participate. Here, political parties and election candidates should not take voting as a taken-for-granted part of the repertoire of residents’ political activities. Election campaigns – both online (internet) and offline (door-to-door engagements, posters, and billboards) remain a powerful medium to improve visibility and deliver messages to solicit interest from citizens. But once these campaigns conclude, still, it remains an individual’s choice to want to participate in the elections. While it is difficult to assess the level of voter engagement with the election campaigns under COVID-19 restrictions, the general political climate in South Africa seems to be conducive for free and fair elections. Yet political assassinations continue to cast a dark shadow over the local government elections. This cruel feature of political life in the country serves as an ultimate intimidation tactic. It denies candidates the right to stand for election and citizens to choose their preferred public representatives.

Thirdly, Hahn argues that for people to want to participate in the political process, their participation must matter. Therefore, aside from building a sense of agency and encouraging greater participation in elections, people still need to be convinced that their vote counts and influences decisions at the local level, where voters have the chance to participate directly in the election of local councillors.

Disrupting the balance of power in local councils

Regardless of the challenges it faces, the ANC remains in pole position to retain most of the local councils it leads. I believe there is much to be discontented about, but opposition parties – including civic forums – have yet to build the power to break the stranglehold the ANC has on elections – and that is no small task.

Interestingly, in contrast to the DA, the ANC has paradoxically avoided announcing their mayoral candidates in direct response to prevent the electoral backlash it received in the metros during the 2016 local government elections. Yet, except for a few local councils in several provinces, the metros are precisely where the most significant disruption to the balance of power will occur.

Whether political parties will deal with the standoffs of coalition politics in hung councils, while broaching complex issues, remains a concern for South Africans. But elections remain an excellent opportunity for citizens to participate and influence local political decision-making.

News Archive

Questions about racial integration in residences answered

2007-07-31

Answers to frequently asked questions about the racial integration of student residences at the UFS

1. Why does the UFS want to change the current situation in the student residences?

There are many reasons why a new approach to placement in the student residences is necessary. However, the main reason is of an educational nature. As a university, the UFS should create an environment in its residences where students can learn to appreciate and respect the rich diversity that is on offer at the university. A university accommodates students from many different backgrounds in terms of race, language, religion, economic status, culture and other aspects. If a student can learn to appreciate the value in this rich diversity at university, he or she will also be able to appreciate the value of this diversity in the workplace and broader society.

The current situation of predominantly white and predominantly black residences has not been able to cultivate such an appreciation for diversity and respect for one another as human beings, and will not equip students with the knowledge and skills required to manage diversity.

Besides this, there are many other areas of life in the residences that need attention. For one, we need to urgently establish a human rights culture in the residences so that the rights of all students can be respected. We need to address the abuse of alcohol, provide disabled students with their rightful place, and last but not least, really entrench a culture of learning in student residences.

Let us make the residences places we can be proud of – places of learning, of diversity, of respect; places of growth and development. This is the ideal we should all strive to achieve.

2. Why does the management want to force us to integrate?

It is a false argument to debate the issue in terms of “force”. Any decision by a University, or any other organisation, regarding matters of policy, rules and regulations implies a restriction on the choice of an individual and an obligation to comply. What we should focus on is whether this decision of the Council is in the best interests of our students.

The management of the university believes that it has a responsibility to give students the best education possible, not only in terms of what you learn in the lecture rooms, but especially in the residences as well. The residences can be very powerful places of learning about matters of great importance, both academic and non-academic.

The parallel-medium language policy separates students into largely white/Afrikaans and black/English classes. Efforts are being made to bridge this divide in the classroom, but we can also try to eliminate it in the residences.

The university is committed to building a new culture for the entire institution that is based on values and principles – such as an academic culture, non-racialism, respect for human rights and diversity – among staff and students.

In the context of student residences, the application of these values and principles still allows substantial room for the voluntary exercising of choice by individuals as well as by Residence Committees, notably with regard to the placement of students (they can still place 50 percent of first-year students), as well as the determination of the future character and traditions of a diverse residence.

Furthermore, students can still choose their residences (subject to availability of places), can choose a roommate, and so forth.

3. What about freedom of association?

The rights we enjoy in a democracy must be balanced against other rights, as well as the laws of the country. This means that the right to freedom of association must be balanced against laws that make it illegal to discriminate against other people on the basis of race, language or religion, for instance.

Freedom of association pertains to the right of individuals to form voluntary organisations such as clubs or private boarding houses, or their right to join or not join existing organisations. You exercise that right when you decide to become a student of the UFS, and again when you choose to live in one of its residences.

However, once you have decided to join an organisation voluntarily, you cannot subsequently demand that that organisation should provide a “club” or residence to your liking where, for instance, you only associate with your choice of co-members. You must accept the policies of that organisation.

In any case, how would that right of yours be balanced against the right of another individual who wishes to associate with a different set of co-members? (For instance – what about the freedom of a student to associate with students NOT from his own background, but indeed from another language, cultural, racial or economic background?)

The constitutional right to freedom of association can, in any case, not be used to exclude or discriminate on the basis of race or religion (Section 18 of the Bill of Rights).

Besides, the new policy guidelines will still make provision for freedom of association. This right can be exercised freely within a diverse residence with regard to friendships, joint academic work, socialising, sport, etc.

4. Will residences not lose their traditions?

The University appreciates that there are many valuable elements of tradition in residences. However, we must bear in mind that the traditions and character of student residences have evolved and changed over time, and they will continue to evolve and to change. In addition, we do not need to accept all aspects of residence life purely on the basis of tradition, including the unacceptably high level of alcohol abuse and unsavoury, humiliating and discriminatory orientation practices. The new approach to integrated residences provides the opportunity to retain the positive aspects of the current traditions and character, but also to develop new traditions and give residences a new character.

We can now establish a tradition and a character for each residence that are reconcilable with the values of the University as a place of scholarship and are aligned with the human rights approach of our country’s Constitution, the laws of our country and the strengths and diversity of the students in a particular residence.

5. Have students been involved in this process? Is there a role for them to play after the decision has been taken by the Council of the UFS?

In the first semester of 2007, during two rounds of consultations, the primes, SRC and student organisations were consulted about the proposed new placement policy to increase diversity in residences. Some residences also made written submissions on the matter (such as Madelief, Soetdoring, Wag-'n-bietjie, Vergeet-my-nie, Emily Hobhouse). Other residences requested and were granted more time, but did not make any submissions in the end (such as Reitz and Armentum).

Management also had several meetings with the above-mentioned structures to hear first-hand from students their concerns and solutions regarding possible challenges presented by integration in residences.

During these interactions, several excellent ideas and proposals were put forward by students. These views had a definite impact on the eventual proposal that was taken to the University Council, in particular regarding the minimum level of diversity (30%) in junior residences and the fact that residences still want to have a say in the placement of students, rather than the placement decision being left in the hands of Management alone (hence the 50% placement portion of residences). Management values the effort that was put into the process by the primes and residence committees, and thanks them for their contributions.

However, it should be stressed that consultation should not be understood as a process of negotiation, nor does it imply that consensus must be reached. What it means is that Management must take a considered decision after hearing the views of stakeholders.

Management would like students to continue to provide input and ideas regarding the implementation details of the policy guidelines. Task teams have been established and students will be informed about how they can interact with the task teams on an ongoing basis.

6. But integration in the residences was tried in the past (in the late 1990s), and then it failed. Why will it work now?

Yes, the University of the Free State did integrate its residences as far back as 1993, and for a few years it worked. The UFS did it at that time and is now doing so again, because it is the right thing to do. Yet it is important to understand why the previous attempt at racial integration in residences was not successful.

Firstly, both black and white students were much polarised because of the apartheid past. Secondly, there was insufficient management support for students in the residences, the student leaders generally as well as residence heads, in terms of dealing with diversity and related issues. Thirdly, the institutional culture of the UFS and the residences in particular was not addressed as part of broader transformation and integration in residences, whereas it is now being addressed.

In addition, the current decision to integrate residences has the benefit of being implemented after several more years of integration in schooling, sport, workplaces and other aspects of life.

This decision is also based on Management’s commitment to give all the possible support it can to this process.

This is a very important initiative that the UFS is undertaking. Management, in co-operation with students, must ensure that it succeeds. Integrated residences that produce high-quality graduates equipped to deal with the challenges of the workplace and our society is a worthwhile ideal we should all strive to achieve.

If you would like to make a proposal regarding the implementation and practical aspects of the new policy, please send it to the following email address: rector@ufs.ac.za

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