Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
24 March 2022 | Story Portia Arodi | Photo Supplied
Portia Arodi
Portia Arodi, Interdisciplinary Master’s in Human Rights, Free State Centre for Human Rights, Faculty of Law

Opinion article by Portia Arodi, Interdisciplinary Master’s in Human Rights, Class of 2022 Free State Centre for Human Rights, Faculty of Law, University of the Free State.
Human Rights Day means different things to different people. For some people, Human Rights Day means commemorating the day of the 1960 massacre when 69 people were shot and killed by police in Sharpeville.   In my opinion, Human Rights Day not only symbolises the historical events that occurred in 1960, but it also provides evidence of the inequalities that currently exist in South Africa.   The labour market in South Africa is still racialised and gender biased. The black majority in the labour market earns way less than their white counterparts, even though both are immersed in the same working conditions. According to Statistics South Africa (2015), the differences in the income of South Africans remain heavily racialised. Furthermore, since 1994, bridging the gap between gender and race continues to be a struggle. On the other hand, black women experience the same inequalities as their male counterparts. The difference is that black females are subject to double discrimination, based not only on their race, but on their gender as well. Despite occupying the same positions as males and assuming similar duties and workload, their salaries remain low. 
  
Human rights in an unequal society

On the other hand, for some categories of people – namely the elite and those in power – Human Rights Day amounts to a democratic South Africa, a country where the constitution is the supreme law of the land and where everyone (without exception) enjoys freedom and human rights. For this particular section of the ruling class and elite, Human Rights Day attests to the effective transition from the apartheid era to a democratic society characterised by freedom, equality, and dignity for all.

For those who lack access to basic needs such as water, food, shelter, health care, electricity, and sanitation, their perception of Human Rights Day may be very different, as they live in poverty with no promising future prospects.  In fact, for the larger section of the population, democratic South Africa is nothing but a burden that does not have much to offer.  Indeed, how to explain that in 2022, the black majority still relies on the bucket system for sanitation; how to understand that to date, they still survive in squatter camps and go through days and nights on an empty stomach? 

It is my contention that the celebration of Human Rights Day has failed to consider a holistic approach to highlighting and raising awareness on critical issues, including poverty and inequality. The realisation of socio-economic rights by authorities exists only on paper but is yet to be done effectively. The provision of service delivery, health-care services, infrastructure, the right to food, education, and other basic needs remains characteristic of modern South African society. From this perspective, it means that we are celebrating one part while neglecting the other.

Would it be fair to celebrate Human Rights Day when there are still children studying under trees?
Would it be fair to celebrate Human Rights Day when there are children going to school without food?
Would it be fair to celebrate Human Rights Day when there are children who are not able to go to school or receive basic education?
Would it be fair to celebrate Human Rights Day when racism is still occurring in our schools and workplaces?
Would it be fair to celebrate Human Rights Day when children are being raped by their teachers at school?
Would it be fair to celebrate Human Rights Day when some universities are still using Afrikaans as their primary language?
Would it be fair to celebrate Human Rights Day when our students are being deprived of education due to the mandatory vaccination policy?
Would it be fair to celebrate Human Rights Day when white privilege still exists among university students?

Is Human Rights Day still worth commemorating?

What are we celebrating on Human Rights Day?  Are we celebrating the achievements of the minority population? Are we celebrating the few changes that have occurred since the advent of a democratic South Africa? Are we celebrating the Fees Must Fall movement that occurred in a contest where some students who were fighting for free education were arrested, shot, and even killed? Are we simply referring to what occurred in 1960? Why are we not celebrating the Fees Must Fall movement? Why are we not celebrating the Rhodes Must Fall movement? Why are we not celebrating the Steyn Must Fall movement? 

On 21 March 2022:

We need to celebrate the Fees Must Fall movement.  
We need to celebrate the Rhodes Must Fall movement.
We need to celebrate the Steyn Must Fall movement.
We need to fight for the voiceless. 
We need to get commitment from government to abolish the use of the bucket system.
We need to get a commitment from government to build more schools, hospitals, shelters, roads, and other infrastructure.
We need to get commitment from government to hire more teachers. 
We need to get commitment from government on protection against racism that occurs in schools and universities. 

We need to get commitment from government regarding the abolition of the mandatory vaccination policies at universities.

On Human Rights Day, let us evaluate whether the Constitution of South Africa is protecting and safeguarding the rights of all human beings, irrespective of their gender, race, ethnic group, socio-economic status … etc.  Is this the democratic South Africa we would want our children and great-grandchildren to have in 50 years? If not, then we have a responsibility to find better ways in which the Constitution of South Africa functions as intended. 

News Archive

UFS welcomes two new deans in the faculties of Theology and Law
2014-08-04

 

The university council has approved the appointment of two deans: Prof Fanie Snyman, at the Faculty of Theology and Prof Caroline Nicholson, at the Faculty of Law.

Both professors offer the university a wealth of knowledge and experience in research and teaching.

Prof Fanie Snyman

Prof Snyman joined the university in 1984 as a senior lecturer in the Department Old Testament. His career followed a steadfast ascent which led him to attaining the title of professor and head of department the following year. On 1 July 2013, Prof Snyman took on the additional role of acting dean of the faculty.

As dean, he set out a clear vision of academic leadership with four primary focus areas: research, teaching and learning, internationalisation and regional engagement.

He is the author of eight books and contributed to seven internationally- and twelve nationally-published books. He has published nine articles in international journals and about 60 more in accredited journals.

Prof Snyman proposes to bring staff members together to extensively rethink and reposition the faculty in terms of identity, transformation and the way forward. “We live in a complex world, characterised by uncertainty and in constant change. This calls for complex but also innovative solutions,” he says.

Prof Caroline Nicholson

Prof Caroline Nicholson was born in Scotland and came to South Africa as a young child. She obtained her BProc and LLB degrees at the University of the Witwatersrand and completed her articles of clerkship at Chernin’s in Hyde Park Corner, Johannesburg. Prof Nicholson was admitted as both an attorney and notary public of the then Supreme Court of South Africa in 1986.

In 1986 she joined the University of South Africa (UNISA ) as a lecturer and remained there until 1999. During this time she completed an LLM in Banking Law and an LLD in Comparative Conflict of Laws – focusing on international parental child abduction. During the same year she moved to the Faculty of Law at the University of Pretoria where she worked for the last fifteen years. In 2003 she completed a Postgraduate Diploma in Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) and has an abiding interest in ADR, especially within the Family Law context.

Prof Nicholson has produced numerous articles and research presentations on a variety of legal subjects. Her primary areas of interest are, however, legal education and child law. She is known both nationally and internationally for her research contributions.

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