Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
26 October 2022 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Supplied
Dr Carol Chi Ngang
Dr Carol Chi Ngang, a category C2-rated researcher and research fellow in the UFS Free State Centre for Human Rights, has been appointed as the UNDP Human Rights Research Chair at the National University of Lesotho, where he is currently affiliated.


A National Research Foundation category C2-rated researcher and research fellow in the Free State Centre for Human Rights at the University of the Free State (UFS), Dr Carol Chi Ngang, has been appointed as United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Human Rights Research Chair at the National University of Lesotho, where he is currently affiliated. 

According to Dr Ngang, the Human Rights Chair was established with the broad mandate to undertake and promote cutting-edge policy research, curriculum development, and community engagement. He says the chair is envisaged to generate a steady stream of research outputs on various aspects of human rights in Lesotho, and most importantly, to explore the human rights components of the Sustainable Development Goals.

For establishing the Human Rights Chair and funding its programme activities, Dr Ngang expresses his gratitude to the United Nations Tripartite Partnership (UNTPP), the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Lesotho.

Knowledge-based foundation for a human rights culture

Dr Ngang states that the establishment of the UNDP Human Rights Chair in the Faculty of Law at the National University of Lesotho is not only timely, but also indispensable in the sense that it provides the opportunity to lay a solid knowledge-based foundation for a human rights culture in Lesotho to respond to and seek to redress the exigencies and the lived experiences of the Basotho. 

“With the country’s political landscape characterised for the last decades by, among others, a distressed economy, shaky coalition governments, and instability, Lesotho’s human rights record is not an impressive one.”

Dr Ngang elaborates, “In spite of a cabinet decision taken as far back as 1995 and the adoption of the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution Act in 2011 – with explicit provision for the establishment of the Lesotho Human Rights Commission – 27 years down the line the august institution, which is supposed to oversee the promotion and protection of human rights in Lesotho, is yet to see the light of day. Lesotho remains one of the few countries in Africa and around the world that is yet to put in place a human rights commission to ensure protection of the vulnerable population, of which the constitutionally guaranteed fundamental rights are threatened on a daily basis.”

According to him, one of the most pressing issues in the human rights field currently, is the establishment of the Lesotho Human Rights Commission. “It is a central concern not only for our funders and the Ministry of Law and Justice and the many other active forces that have invested time and resources in the process, but importantly, also for the Lesotho society at large,” he states.

“Without the commission, the vulnerability of the population is multiplied.”

Effecting real transformation in the human rights situation in Lesotho

Dr Ngang says in the absence of a human rights commission, besides focusing on research and the dissemination of knowledge, the Human Rights Chair will additionally cover gaps in the areas of advocacy, amicus curiae interventions, and public interest litigation in human rights matters before the courts.

“It is our anticipation that the research outputs generated by the Human Rights Chair will be utilised productively, including by Lesotho-based civil society organisations, to inform policy advocacy and most essentially, leverage policy formulation, decision making, and resource allocation for the realisation of human rights in the country.”

Dr Ngang also foresees that it will shape the direction of governance and governmental actions in meeting the global Sustainable Development Goal targets, as well as the strategic objective of national transformation as outlined in the Lesotho National Strategic Development Plan II. 

The Human Rights Chair, he says, has established working relations with the Ministry of Law and Justice, as well as a collaborative partnership with the Lesotho NGO sector, and envisages doing so with the private sector and other major stakeholders. “These strategic alliances are intended to ensure that knowledge generated by the chair through research is utilised by the relevant stakeholders to effect real transformation as far as the human rights situation in Lesotho is concerned.”

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