Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
21 September 2023 | Story Motsaathebe Serekoane | Photo supplied
Motsaathebe Serekoane
Motsaathebe Serekoane is a Lecturer and BSocSc Programme Director, Department of Anthropology, UFS.

Opinion Article by Motsaathebe Serekoane, Lecturer and BSocSc Programme Director, Department of Anthropology, University of the Free State.


It is our heritage space; it is my private property: the challenge of access to heritage sites on privately owned land. 

The Free State's sacred valleys represent not only our heritage space but also private property. This dual nature presents a challenge in terms of gaining access to heritage sites situated on privately owned land.

Following the enactment of the country's constitution in 1996, segregation boundaries were abolished, granting public access to spaces that were once restricted. Evidence indicates an increase in accessibility to spaces that were traditionally exclusive. However, despite the ideals of inclusion and participation enshrined in the Constitution, property ownership practices and the right to restrict access continue to render sacred natural sites inaccessible to pilgrims. 

Sacred natural sites hold spiritual significance for people, transcending intrinsic or instrumental value. They are culturally and historically significant for people seeking to reconnect with their ancestors, undergo spiritual cleansing, receive training in spiritual healing and ask for guidance and forgiveness. For the Basotho people, the natural environment is an aspect of material reality through which the sacred is manifested. As such, they have returned to reclaim sacred spaces through spiritual journeys to sites like Mantsopa at Modderpoort, Mautse and Nkokomohi Valley near Rosendal, Motouleng near Clarens, and Witsie’s Cave in Qwaqwa.

Ownership rights and reserved rights vs access rights

The conflict between farm owners and pilgrims began when the former claimed exclusive ownership rights and reserved rights to access, while the latter only sought access rights without contesting ownership. According to Section 27 Subsection 8 of the National Heritage Resources Act, 25 1999 (NHRA), a site of significance can be nominated for declaration by the provincial or national heritage body. All the relevant sites were nominated at various times over the past decade and received provisional protection, but they were never formally declared. As a result, these sites have only enjoyed informal and provisional formal protection. In the case of informal heritage sites like Mautse and Motouleng, the private property owners have the legal right to deny entry to their properties and, consequently, the sacred sites.

Land regulation, particularly the Enlightenment-era separation of culture from nature, and the introduction of private ownership and commodification of nature in what were once  ‘traditional’ landscapes, in the African context, have placed many of the sacred sites under a terminal threat over the years. The complexities surrounding the sites persist, as seen in the closure of Mautse in 2016 due to a change in farm ownership. In 2020, Motouleng was also closed, with police forcefully evicting pilgrims on-site at the start of the hard lockdown of the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak. Furthermore, the structures within Motouleng Cave were destroyed by fire.

In recent years, the recognition of consequences for the affected communities and society at large due to the continued loss of sacred places, along with the role and function of pilgrimage to these sites, and related spiritual practices, has been growing. Urgent action from stakeholders at all levels, from international agencies to the local communities, is increasingly advocated to protect this heritage. The closure or denial of access to sacred sites is spreading rapidly. On 4 August 2023, the following access request was made: 

“We were asking for access to pray by the cave called Lehaha la Makhakha in Bothaville tomorrow. We spoke to the owner, but he refused to give us access. His reason for refusing is that other people are using candles which may cause fire and damage to the property, but we didn’t use candles even on 1 July 2023 we prayed, and no damages were incurred. The neighbourhood watch can attest to that. We have been using the prayer cave since 2016. We ask permission to pray.”

We need to dialogue

The conflict between the right to ownership and the right to access is a complex challenge, not only from the legal point of view but also considering South Africa’s complicated history and the cultural differences and contestations that exist. To address the past inequalities, the NHRA provides for the expropriation, subject to compensation, of private property ‘for conservation or any other purpose under this Act if that purpose is public or is in the public interest’, as outlined in Section 46(1). This aligns with Sections 25(2) and (3) of the Constitution (1996), which specify various conditions and circumstances to be considered regarding compensation amounts. Subsection (4) defines public interest to include “the nation’s commitment to land reform, and to reforms to bring about equitable access to all South Africa’s natural resources”. There is no doubt that the sacred sites serve a public interest, aligning effectively with the theory of commons. This has two implications: firstly, sacred natural sites are a kind of commons that cannot be privatized as they cannot have one exclusive owner. Secondly, sacred natural sites need to possess some kind of public property status to be accessible to all potential visitors who may have relational values regarding that site. 

What does this mean for promises of the Constitution and the National Heritage Resources Act? While we are enjoying a braai, let us also remember we need to dialogue on matters that continue to undermine the realisation of the idealism of heritage as cultural capital. This can help South Africa define its cultural identity, build the nation, affirm our diverse cultures, facilitate healing and material and symbolic restitution, and in doing so, shape our national character. 

News Archive

African Student Affairs Conference a huge success
2011-05-24

 
Mr Rudi Buys, UFS Dean of Student Affairs, Mr. Folabi Obembe, Managing Director of Worldview International, Ms Birgit Schreiber, Director of the Centre for Student support services at the University of the Western Cape, Dr. Augustinah Duyilemi, Dean of Student Affairs at the Adekunleh Ajasin University in Nigeria, Dr. Christina Lunceford, assistant Director for the Centre for Research on Educational Access and Leadership at California State University in America, and Prof. Cecil Bodibe, student affairs veteran and consultant.
Photo: Earl Coetzee

The African Student Affairs Conference (ASAC), which took place on our Main Campus last week, was a major success, with two days of lectures and discussions and two pleasant social gatherings, where delegates had the opportunity to get to know each other.

The conference, hosted on African soil for the first time, and co-hosted by the University of the Western Cape (UWC), started on Wednesday 18 May 2011 with an informal welcoming session. Delegates got to meet each other and Mr Rudi Buys, UFS Dean of Student Affairs, explained the meaning of South African words like "kuier" and "lekker'.

The official start of events took place on Thursday 19 May 2011, in the Reitz Hall in our Centenary Complex. The conference was attended by delegates from universities across the continent and aimed to place the focus on issues relating to student affairs in an African context.

Delegates shared and exchanged strategies, ideas and resources, and discussed issues related to the work of student affairs professionals. The conference hoped to promote an exchange of best practice and assist attendees in identifying successful programmes.

Among the topics discussed on the first day, were “Constructing Post-Conflict Democracy on campus: a case study of transformation of student governance and political engagement as post-conflict intervention”, by Mr. Buys, and a discussion on ways in which social and online media can be used to ease the challenges of student interaction, development and support, by Ms Birgit Schreiber, Director of the Centre for Student Support Services at UWC.

A panel discussion, led by Mr Buys and several members of our Interim Student Council (ISC), discussed the specific challenges faced at the UFS.  The importance of buy-in from role-players in decisions taken by University management in order to ensure their success, was discussed, using the UFS and our recent changes as an example.

The successful integration of residences on campus inevitably came under the spotlight and the recently resolved Reitz-saga was named as a catalyst in getting students less apathetic and more involved in attempts at creating racial and social harmony.

Dr Christina Lunceford, Assistant-Director of the Centre for Research on Educational Access and Leadership at California State University, presented a paper entitled A National Approach to Building Capacity in Student Affairs in South African Higher Education.

She commented on the fact that there is little or no philosophical framework or explicit theory that informs practice of student services in South Africa.

According to Dr Lunceford, student development should be a key concern for every department or unit within student services and emphasized the need for a centralized student development unit at each university.
She also touched on the need for institutions to implement support from international student affairs professional associations, professional development for student affairs practitioners, the utilization of technology to support professionals in the field, and working with international partners to explore future opportunities, as ways in which student affairs can be used to drive performance and change at universities.

The conference continued in the Scaena theatre on Friday 20 May 2011, with presentations by Dr Augustinah Duyileme, Dean of Student Affairs at Adekunle Ajasin University in Nigeria, and Prof. Bobby Mandew, Executive Director of Student Affairs at the University of Johannesburg (UJ).

Dr Duyileme presented a paper on the challenges faced by Nigerian universities with regard to student conflict and protests, which often turn violent, and how such violence can be curbed through proper planning and management.

Prof. Mandew presented a very well-received presentation on UJ’s successful off-campus housing initiative, which involves home-owners and business owners in the areas surrounding their campuses.

Their approach demonstrated how proper planning can prevent problems associated with over-population in private homes and conflict with neighbours of the university, usually related to an influx of students into residential neighbourhoods.

This problem is faced by many universities, as more and more students flock to universities on the continent and campus residents cannot accommodate them.

The conference came to a close on Friday, with most delegates agreeing that the exchange of knowledge which took place was extremely valuable.

Ms Deborah Lahlan, of Nigeria, said: “This is an important conference for Africa and it should become a regular event.”
 

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