Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
29 November 2023 | Story Anthony Mthembu | Photo Anthony Mthembu and Reabetswe Parkies
EMS Faculty hosts Inaugural Debate in Broadening Curricular Debate series
Carnegie Math Pathways Team- From left to right: Dr Andre Freeman; Chair of the Mathematics Department at Capital Community College, Karon Klipple; Lecturer at the University of New Mexico, Annari Muller; Chairperson of the Learning, Teaching and Digitisation Committee (UFS), Lewis Hosie; Director of Development and Implementation for the Carnegie Math Pathways, Haley McNamara; Research Associate at the Carnegie Math Pathways and Dan Ray; Operations Director for the Carnegie Math Pathways.

The Economics and Management Sciences (EMS) Faculty at the University of the Free State (UFS) recently inaugurated its first Broadening Curricular Debate series, a concept conceived by the Dean of the Faculty, Prof Phillipe Burger. The inaugural debate, held on 22 November 2023 in the Equitas Senate Hall on the UFS Bloemfontein Campus, marked the beginning of a series designed to facilitate discussions among academics on crucial higher education matters.  Annari Muller, Chairperson of the Learning, Teaching and Digitisation Committee (LTDC), expressed the series’ purpose: “We organised this debate series to provide a platform for academics to discuss vital higher education matters. These sessions aim to stimulate critical conversations that empower UFS staff to enrich our curricula, enhance teaching practices, and shape broader educational strategies.’’ 

The motion presented to the house was, ‘The rapid integration of Artificial Intelligence in higher education perpetuates educational inequalities, widens the digital divide, and diminishes the value of personal instruction. The debate followed the structure of Intelligence Squared debates, with two teams comprising UFS staff from diverse departments, including the Department of Business Management, Department of English, Department of Public Management and the Department of Mathematical Statistics and Actuarial Science.

Naquita Fernandes, the Master of the House for the debate, emphasised the deliberate inclusion of members from diverse fields to infuse varied perspectives into the debate. “We believed that this diverse amalgamation of expertise would offer multifaceted insights, ensuring a holistic exploration of the subject matter. The debate structure was meticulously designed to encourage engaging discussions rather than formal academic presentations, allowing for a robust exchange of ideas.’’

The audience had the opportunity to vote on their stance before and after the debate, determining the winning team based on their ability to sway the audience with compelling arguments. The winning team, composed of Dr Hilary Bama (Senior Lecturer in the Department of Business Management), Dr Martin Rossouw (Senior Lecturer in Film and Visual Media), and Dr Rick De Villiers (Senior Lecturer in the English Department), successfully argued against the motion. 

The proposition team highlighted the existing gap between those with access to digital technologies and those without, advocating for a gradual and considered approach to AI integration in higher education. In contrast, the opposition team underscored the value of personal instruction in the face of AI, emphasising AI’s potential to provide constructive and effective feedback,  contribute to adaptive learning platforms, and accommodate unique learning styles and preferences. 

Following the debate, the audience was addressed by a team from Carnegie Math Pathways, providing insights into generative AI tools. Fernandes described the event as a proactive step in shaping the UFS academic landscape, moving away from reactive responses and exploring critical topics and strategies that could influence future policies and practices. 

         EMS Faculty hosts Inaugural Debate in Broadening Curricular Debate series

The Debaters- From left to right: Dr Martin Rossouw; Senior Lecturer in Film and Visual Media, Herkulaas Michael Combrink; Co-Director of Digital Futures, Dr Hilary Bama; Senior Lecturer in the EMS Faculty, Dr Rick De Villiers; Lecturer in the Department of English, Dr Michele Von Maltitz; Senior Lecturer in the Department of Mathematical Statistics and Actuarial Science, and Nkosingiphile Emmanuel Mkhize; Lecturer and Researcher in the Department of Public Management. 

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