Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
13 August 2024 | Story André Damons | Photo Supplied
Maricel-van-Rooyen
Maricél van Rooyen, Project Manager for Research Information Management System (RIMS) and Research Ethics Adviser in the Directorate Research Development (DRD) at the University of the Free State (UFS), is the Programme Coordinator for a first-of-its-kind Southern African Research and Innovation Management Association (SARIMA)/ COP webinar on Environment and Biosafety Research Ethics.

The University of the Free State (UFS) is playing host to a first-of-its-kind webinar on Environment and Biosafety Research Ethics later this month with Maricél van Rooyen, Project Manager for Research Information Management System (RIMS) and Research Ethics Adviser in the Directorate Research Development (DRD), playing a pivotal role.

The webinar, which is part of the Eastern Region Community of Practice (COP), is taking place on 20 August. The target market for this virtual workshop is Biosafety and Environmental Research Ethics Committee (REC) chairpersons and members, professionals including research management professionals, administrators, research compliance managers and advisers, and research directors in Southern Africa and beyond.

Van Rooyen will be the Programme Coordinator for this Southern African Research and Innovation Management Association (SARIMA)/ COP Research Ethics Webinar, while Prof Robert Bragg, chairperson of the UFS Environmental and Biological Research Ethics Committee (EBREC), will give a presentation on the establishment of an EBREC.

The UFS, Stellenbosch University and the University of the Witwatersrand, form part of the COP which is a SARIMA (Southern African Research and Innovation Management Association) initiative to assist and share research ethics questions between institutions to empower research management and ethics compliance. SARIMA assisted with the online hosting and advertising of the webinar.

Purpose of the webinar

“Environment and Biosafety Committees in South Africa are a new idea, and only a few institutions in the country have such a committee. The UFS and the other institutions that will present at the workshop, take a leading role because they have already registered committees in place. We want to share and assist with establishing and operating such committees,” says Van Rooyen.

According to her, the need for the webinar arises from the upsurge of research and innovation in biotechnology and related fields over the past two decades that has led to exciting new discoveries in areas such as the engineering of biological processes, gene editing, stem cell research, CRISPR-Cas9 technology, Synthetic Biology, recombinant DNA, LMOs and GMOs, to mention only a few.

These advances, however, have generated concerns about biosafety, biosecurity and adverse impacts on biodiversity and the environment, leading to the establishment of Research Ethics Committees (RECs) at Higher Education and Research Institutions dedicated to reviewing research with implications for biosafety and the environment.

These EBRECs are in the early stages of their establishment and formalisation in South Africa, and there is much uncertainty about their composition, scope, procedures of decision-making and the principles that should guide their deliberations and assessments.

Leading the charge

The UFS took the lead in South Africa in ensuring international ethical compliance in this extended area of research, by establishing its own Environmental and Biological Research Ethics Committee (EBREC) six years ago. The UFS EBREC is one of only two such ethics committees at a South African university that combines the biosafety committee with environmental and biological research ethics to ensure ethics compliance in these fields.  The initiative started with Van Rooyen and her RIMS EthicsTeam, (Willem Kilian and Amanda Smith). The university is again taking charge with this webinar, which is a first of its kind.  

News Archive

Protection of Information bill- opinions from our experts
2011-11-28

Prof. Hussein Solomon
Senior Professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of the Free State. 

In recent years, given their failure to effectively govern, the ANC has become increasingly defensive. These defensive traits have become particularly acute in light of the various corruption scandals that members of the ruling party involve themselves in.
 
Given the fact that for now they are assured of an electoral majority (largely on account of their anti-apartheid credentials), coupled with the fact that they have managed to make parliament a rubber stamp of the executive as opposed to holding the executive accountable, it is the media which has increasingly held the ruling party to account by exposing such corruption and incompetence in government.
 
The passing of the information bill, therefore, is not merely an attack on the media, but an attack on the pivotal issue of accountability. Without accountability, there can be no democracy.
 
By defining national interest broadly, by refusing to accept a public interest clause in the bill, the ANC increasingly shows its disdain to South Africa's constitution and its citizens.
 
More importantly, as former Minister of Intelligence and ANC stalwart Ronnie Kasrils pointedly makes clear, the ANC is also betraying its own noble struggle against the odious apartheid regime. It was the media which played a key role in exposing apartheid's excesses, it is the same media which is coming under attack by the heirs of PW Botha's State Security Council - Minister of State Security Siyabong Cwele and his security apparatchiks whose mindsets reflect more Stalin's Gulag's than the values of the Freedom Charter.
 
The passing of this bill is also taking place at a time when journalists have had their phones attacked, where the judiciary has been deliberately undermined and parliament silenced.
 
Democrats beware!

 
Prof. Johann de Wet
Chairperson: Department of Communication Science 
 
The ANC’s insistence on passing the Protection of State Information Bill in its current form and enforcing it by law, means that the essence of our democratic state and the quality of life of every citizen is at stake.
 
Yes, our freedom as academics, researchers, mass media practitioners and citizens comes into play. Freedom implies the right to choose and is, along with equality, an underlying principle which helps make democracy happen. While the South African state needs to protect (classify) information which could threaten its security and/or survival, the omission of a public interest clause in the Bill at this stage effectively denies a citizen the right to freedom of information.
 
 Freedom of information, along with press freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of association and religious freedom, are essential to democracy. These freedoms are granted because they conform to basic liberal ideas associated with (Western) democracy and which resonate with South Africa’s liberal constitution, such as (1) belief in the supreme value of the individual (and thus not of the state); (2) belief that the individual has natural rights (rights which belong to all human beings by nature – such as the right to life and to control government)) which exist independently of government, and which ought to be protected by and against government; and (3) recognition of the supreme value of the individual. 
 
One wonders how many cases of South African government corruption and mismanagement would have been uncovered by investigative journalists over the past number of years if this Bill in its current form was on the statute books. This Bill represents a backward step from the promise of democracy of having an informed public. The former National Party government had similar laws in place and one does not want to go there again. The infamous Information Scandal in South Africa of some thirty years ago, or Muldergate as it has come to be known, reminds one of what governments can do when it works clandestinely.
 
What South Africans need, is more information on what government structures are doing and how they are doing it with taxpayers’ money, not less information. While information in itself does not equal communication or dialogue, it is an indispensable part thereof, and the need for dialogue based on verifiable information is urgent for meeting vexed challenges facing South African communities. Academics in all fields of specialisation are constantly in need of untainted information to pursue answers and/or offer solutions to where South Africa should be moving in all spheres of life.

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