Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
17 February 2023 | Story Valentino Ndaba | Photo UFS Photo Archive
The UFS Protest Protocol offers the university community safety guidelines during protests, including dos and don’ts for staff and students who are not demonstrating; acceptable and unacceptable behaviour during protests, and how to handle protests in accordance with standard operating procedures

The University of the Free State (UFS) recognises the right of students and staff members to peacefully assemble, picket, and protest in a way that does not interfere with the rights of other members of the university community. At the same time, the safety of all UFS staff and students is one of our top priorities.

The UFS Protest Protocol offers the university community safety guidelines during protests, including dos and don’ts for staff and students who are not demonstrating; acceptable and unacceptable behaviour during protests, and how to handle protests in accordance with standard operating procedures.

As a university, we continuously strive to create an inclusive environment where opposing views are accommodated, and the constitutional right to protest is respected. According to the UFS’s Vision 130 strategy, one of the key principles that drive the institution is social justice: “The university recognises that diversity goes together with a commitment to inclusivity, equity, and social justice. We therefore also commit to creating a culture of care and a vibrant space for, and acceptance of, constructive and critical engagement; where a diversity of often contested ideas and perspectives is not just tolerated, but also fostered through discussion and subsequent implementation.”

What should one do if a protest occurs?

1. Communicate: The university must be informed if it is to respond appropriately to protest action. If you are aware of ongoing or impending protest action, immediately inform the relevant 24/7 Protection Services operational centre.

2. Be informed: In order to respond appropriately to protest action (for your own protection and the protection of others), you need to know about impending or ongoing protests and stay informed on how it unfolds, via official UFS communication platforms and ConnectYard. The latter provides as-it-happens crisis alert notifications via WhatsApp.

3. Keep away: If at all possible, keep away from the area of the protest action. Try to keep others for whom you are responsible away as well.

4. Help others: If someone appears to be in danger or distress, intervene only if you are sure that it is safe for you to do so, and proceed calmly, without provoking protesters. Seek treatment for injuries. Should you or someone else suffer injuries of any kind during protest action, seek treatment from emergency services or Kovsie Health. Contact the Protection Services operational centres for any medical emergencies, so that they can activate the ambulance services according to available protocols.

5. Report: Report all incidents and damages to Protection Services at the numbers provided. It is important that non-protesting staff and students submit statements to the UFS investigating officers for the internal disciplinary process, to prevent similar occurrences in future. Be specific when providing a statement, to enable the investigating team to identify those involved in violent disruptions. Culprits cannot be brought to book if no evidence is available to link them to specific incidents. All reasonable steps will be taken to protect non-protesting staff and students testifying in disciplinary proceedings.

For advice on what to do and what not to do, read the UFS Protest Guidelines booklet. You can also watch the video below for more information:

 

Bloemfontein Campus
Protection Services: +27 51 401 2911 | +27 51 401 2634 | 0800 204 682
Ambulance: +27 80 005 1051 | 10177
Social worker: +27 73 182 3048
Kovsie Health: +27 51 401 2603

Qwaqwa Campus     
Protection Services: +27 58 718 5460 | +27 58 718 5175 | +27 58 718 5360
Ambulance: 10177
Social Worker: +27 58 718 5090 | +27 58 718 5091
Kovsie Health:   +27 58 718 5210                          

South Campus
Protection Services: +27 51 505 1217
Ambulance: +27 80 005 1051 | 10177
Social worker: +27 73 182 3048
Kovsie Health: +27 51 401 2603

 

 

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