Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
13 January 2022 | Story Opinion article by Prof Sethulego Matebesi | Photo Sonia Small
Prof 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 the Department of Sociology, University of the Free State

 

Commissions of inquiry have been a feature of political life in South Africa since 1994. However, the Seriti and Zondo commissions arguably represent the most explicit evidence of the scourge of corruption in democratic South Africa.

The Seriti inquiry into the arms deal, which cost R137 million, was handed over to former President Jacob Zuma in 2016. This commission found no evidence of the 1999 arms deal corruption. However, Justice Raymond Zondo would hand over one of his three reports to President Cyril Ramaphosa in early January six years later.

Despite their similarities – their role in investigating allegations of widespread corruption and the stern rebuke that the commission heads received from certain public sections – there are several fundamental differences between them, with one predominating. The most fundamental difference between them is that the Seriti Commission’s chairperson and commissioner were referred to the Judicial Service Commission on charges of gross misconduct. A full panel of the Gauteng High Court found that the Seriti Commission mysteriously omitted crucial facts before concluding that there was no proof of corruption. Contrarily, evidence presented to the Zondo Commission has already had dire consequences for several individuals, politicians, and state-owned and private companies in South Africa and abroad. While it is still early days, and perhaps unfair to make this comparison between the two commissions, the Zondo Commission has undoubtedly removed some dark stains from the judiciary that do not augur well for democracy.

 

Erosion of ethical conduct

President Ramaphosa’s renewal project, underscored by a commitment to fighting corruption and strengthening governance, has gained traction over the past two years. Nevertheless, as the Zondo report makes abundantly clear, South Africa is struggling to respond effectively to the complexities of corruption and money laundering. As a nation still being forged, too many men and women entrusted to lead this glorious nation have abandoned the cardinal rule that ethical conduct was central to leadership. Instead, they have knowingly become corrupt conduits through their collaboration and conniving to collapse democratic institutions and practices.

No competent government will fold its hands and watch as its citizens’ livelihoods are destroyed by criminal elements within and outside its ranks, as reported by the Zondo Commission. However, we need to credit President Ramaphosa – with all his leadership flaws – for his continued bold statement to implement the commission’s recommendations without fear or favour. We may want to dismiss this boldness as another political gimmick. In any event, I believe that civil society organisations and liberal democratic institutions are converging, as they did in the past, to challenge attempts to circumvent the recommendations of the Zondo Commission.

 

A trial for President Ramaphosa

Several incidences after the release of the Zondo Commission report indicate what we can expect when the final report is released. Of note were some ANC members’ statements that seemed to differ from President Ramaphosa about the need to support the implementation of the commission’s recommendations. Somehow, Ramaphosa will be on trial – fairly or unfairly – during the year. He will have to overcome some challenges, including the dismal performance of the ANC during the 2021 local government elections and his stance on corruption. Yet, thus far, he has managed to shrug off threats from increasingly aggressive and confrontational elements within the ANC.

The ANC will hold its elective conference at the end of the year. Besides the multipronged, political disinformation strategies that often precede such conferences, some defenders of democracy implicated in the Zondo report may join beleaguered activists to crush opponents and settle scores. Others, however, may take the findings against them on review.

Surmounting these threats from within the ANC will depend on the extent to which the President and his supporters are willing to risk his aspiration for a second term instead of serving the long-term interests of South African citizens.

 

Beyond the politics

The Zondo Commission’s report will remain largely fruitless unless it goes hand in hand with political will and oversight to act on recommendations with the prima facie of wrongdoing and criminality. Without the latter, we need to ask serious questions about Parliament, and the Executive’s ability to solve political matters often offloaded onto commissions of inquiry. For example, while I understand the need for an independent anti-corruption agency and other measures to fight craft, we conveniently ignore how the Auditor-General’s reports detailing rampant corruption and blatant criminality (not irregular expenditure as the elite want us to believe) are ignored year after year.

What difference will these measures bring when you still have leaders and officials with malign influence on procurement procedures?

The bickering against the Zondo report and President Ramaphosa will grow louder and dominate the South African political landscape over the next few months. We should consider the advice of former Deputy Chief Justice Dikgang Moseneke, who once noted that integrity in public spaces is indispensable.

News Archive

UFS welcomes Constitutional Court’s ruling on its Language Policy
2017-12-29



The executive management of the University of the Free State (UFS) welcomes today’s judgement by the Constitutional Court in favour of the university’s Language Policy. The judgement follows an appeal lodged by AfriForum against the judgement and order delivered by the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) on the implementation of the UFS Language Policy on 28 March 2017. 
 
In a majority ruling, Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng denied AfriForum’s application for leave to appeal the SCA’s ruling, and said the UFS Council’s approval of the Language Policy was lawful and constitutionally valid. The court found that the adoption of the Language Policy was neither inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution, nor did it violate the Constitutional rights of any students and/or staff members of the UFS.
 
Today’s landmark judgement is not only paving the way for the UFS to continue with the implementation plan for its Language Policy as approved by the UFS Council on 11 March 2016, but it is also an indication of the value which the university’s decision to change its Language Policy to English as primary medium of instruction has on higher education in South Africa.
 
“The judgement by the Constitutional Court is not a victory against Afrikaans as language. The UFS will continue to develop Afrikaans as an academic language. A key feature of the UFS Language Policy is flexibility and the commitment to strive for a truly multilingual environment. Today’s judgement allows the UFS to proceed with the implementation of its progressive approach to a language-rich environment that is committed to multilingualism,” says Prof Francis Petersen, Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the UFS.
 
According to Prof Petersen, the UFS is dedicated to the commitments in the Language Policy and, in particular, to make sure that language development is made available to students in order to ensure their success as well as greater levels of academic literacy – especially in English. This includes contributing to the development of Sesotho and isiZulu as higher-education languages within the context of the needs of the different UFS campuses.
 
“We can now continue to ensure that language is not used or perceived as a tool for the social exclusion of staff and/or students on any of the three campuses, and continue to promote a pragmatic learning and administrative environment committed to and accommodative to linguistic diversity within the regional, national, and international environments in which the UFS operates,” says Prof Petersen.
 
The UFS is the first university in South Africa appearing before the Constitutional Court regarding its Language Policy. 
 
During 2017, the Faculties of Health Sciences, the Humanities, and Law started with the implementation of the new Language Policy at first-year level. This includes the presentation of tutorials in Afrikaans. The remaining faculties will start implementing the policy as from 2018.

Released by:
Lacea Loader (Director: Communication and Brand Management)
Telephone: +27 51 401 2584 | +27 83 645 2454
Email: news@ufs.ac.za | loaderl@ufs.ac.za
Fax: +27 51 444 6393

Related articles:
UFS welcomes unanimous judgement about its Language Policy in the Supreme Court of Appeal (28 March 2017)
Judgement in the Supreme Court of Appeal about UFS Language Policy (17 November 2016)
Implications of new Language Policy for first-year students in 2017 (17 October 2016)
UFS to proceed with appealing to Supreme Court of Appeal regarding new Language Policy (29 September 2016)
UFS to lodge application to appeal judgment about new Language Policy (22 July 2016)
High Court ruling about new UFS Language Policy (21 July 2016)
UFS Council approves a new Language Policy (11 March 2016)

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