Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
08 June 2022 | Story Rulanzen Martin | Photo Pexels
Protest
Student protest has been a hot topic on many campuses across the country.

The University of the Free State (UFS) Faculty of the Humanities provided the platform for a robust dialogue on student protests in South Africa. The round-table discussion, titled ‘Humanistic Perspectives on Student Protests in South Africa’, took place on 30 May 2022, with an impressive panel drawn from the Humanities, senior management of the UFS, and student governance.  

Vice-Dean of the Faculty of the Humanities Prof Chitja Twala said the faculty thought it prudent to lead this discussion by hosting a round-table talk. “Student protest will be with us for some time, and we need to engage and talk about these issues from a humanistic point of view – it is important for us,” he said.

“It is only when we dialogue and engage with each other that we can meet each other halfway and understand the problems students are faced with, and students can understand the problems institutions of higher learning are faced with.”  

The dialogue was an opportunity to discuss humanistic perspectives on student protests and included the following topics, among others: dynamics of student protests, the relationship between politics and protests, why protests are a challenge for the higher education sector, and the possible responses to protests by universities. 

“We wanted an academic experience and we wanted to give a sense of the different kind of angles when looking at protest, and we have not even scratched the surface,” said Prof Heidi Hudson, Dean of the Faculty of the Humanities. 

* Listen to the discussion on the podcast recording below to gain insights from the six speakers. 


Protesting is important in addressing issues

Panellist Prof Sethulego Matebesi, who is an expert on community protests, said protesting is the main modality of expression for social movements in South Africa. He also said that protesting is a key element to celebrate, because people now have the right to protest. 

Student Governance Manager Motlogeloa Moema agreed that protest is important and is not something to be frowned upon. “Protesting is a reaction and a manifestation of grievances that have not been addressed, both in the community and institutions of higher learning,” Moema said. He added that it needs to be acknowledged that protesting is not a bad thing, and that it is “a democratic right enshrined in our Constitution”. 

These sentiments tied in with those of UFS Rector and Vice-Chancellor Prof Francis Petersen, who said that protesting campaigns like the #RhodesMustFall and subsequent #FeesMustFall movements addressed certain issues and were actually helping to resolve and address the issues at hand. “Some of these are not resolved, but the role protest plays is quite critical.” 

Management must ensure stakeholder safety

Prof Petersen aimed to contextualise student protests from the viewpoint of the university management team. He said the UFS is home to both students and staff, and management’s mandate is to ensure that everyone feels welcome and can reach their maximum potential in an enabling environment. “The formal structures must facilitate and ensure that staff and students do what they are here to do,” Prof Petersen said. 

“The question is how that protest is being conducted, as there are rules for protesting; in fact the Constitution tries to assist and guide us on how protest should be conducted,” Prof Petersen said. “Protesting is a constitutional right, and we respect that right at the UFS.”

Student equivalent of dialogue planned

The Division of Student Affairs plans to host a student equivalent of this dialogue in the second semester. “This discussion was to get the perspective from academics, and then we will get the student perspective,” Moema said.

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