Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
06 February 2024 | Story Valentino Ndaba | Photo SUPPLIED
Moot Court 2023
UFS Law Clinic Team (from behind) Ayant Jaggan, Christopher Rawson, Lesenyego Makone, Lesley-Ann Terblanche, Palesa Dingiswayo and Paul Antohnie (Director).

The University of the Free State's (UFS) Faculty of Law recently hosted the 19th annual Kovsie First-Year Moot Court Competition, in collaboration with the UFS Law Clinic and South Africa’s Supreme Court of Appeal.

The event, which took place late last year, marked a significant milestone in experiential legal education, showcasing the dedication and expertise of the university's budding legal minds.

According to Moot Court Coordinator Palesa Dingiswayo, “The competition aimed to empower aspiring legal minds by giving them an opportunity to showcase their skills and knowledge in a simulated courtroom setting. The participants had to research, write, and present their arguments on a challenging case involving customary law, constitutional law, and the law of succession. The case was designed to test their understanding of the law, their ability to apply it to complex facts, and their persuasive power in oral advocacy.”

Recognising excellence

The competition presented awards acknowledging outstanding accomplishments, including the Best Heads of Arguments Award (awarded to Larieschka King and Saurav Maharaj from the University of Johannesburg (UJ), bestowed upon the team that crafted the most lucid, succinct, and persuasive written submissions. This accolade honours proficiency in law and the skill to present arguments logically and cohesively. The Best Speaker Award (awarded to Sechaba Mkhaya from the University of Pretoria) recognises the individual who captivated the judges with their eloquent presentation. This distinction celebrates confidence, charisma, and creativity in delivering arguments with flair and finesse. Lastly, the Best Overall Team Award (awarded to Larieschka King and Saurav Maharaj from UJ) went to the team that excelled in both written and oral aspects. This award acknowledges passion, dedication, and commitment to the cause of justice.

Dingiswayo shared insights into what set the finalists apart in terms of their approach, legal acumen, or presentation skills, stating, "According to the feedback from the judges, the overall team demonstrated an extensive understanding of the law relevant to the competition, enhancing their capacity to address related issues based on the given facts. They showcased excellent research skills. The winning team submitted articulate, concise, and well-crafted heads of arguments that meticulously addressed the legal issues at hand. Moreover, they exhibited strong oral advocacy skills in effectively responding to questions."

Preparation is key

Itumeleng Molelengoane, Former Junior Moot Officer and incoming Chairperson of the UFS’s Moot Court organising group Legal Behemoth, provided insight into the competition's success, emphasising the importance of training sessions.

“I provided training and guidance to the junior law students who participated in the competition,” Molelengoane said. “I hosted three training sessions per semester, where they were taught the basics of research and writing skills, oral advocacy, and court etiquette. I also provided them with feedback and tips on how to improve their performance in the weeks leading up to the competition.” 

The finalist team

First-year student Omphemetse Sothomela, a member of the UFS team that advanced to the finals, highlighted the difficulties in formulating a strong argument for a party facing unfavourable case law and legislation: “This was challenging because we had to tread carefully on the facts in trying to understand how we could give her case some legal and factual substance. We also had to do all of this while sticking to the facts before us and not fabricating anything – and I think that was quite a challenging task.”

Sothomela expressed gratitude for the real-life experience gained and highlighted the importance of teamwork in moot court competitions.

Siyanda Fojile, another finalist from the UFS Team, discussed the challenge of making sense of vague facts in the case. Fojile highlighted the opportunity to learn about court procedure, the importance of respect in and out of the courtroom, and the value of clear and precise writing. “Appearing in the Supreme Court of Appeal was an opportunity I didn't take for granted. It gave me an opportunity to learn more about how one should carry themselves both inside and outside of the courtroom,” Fojile said.

Participants in the Moot Court Competition also learned about ethics and professional conduct during a talk by the Honourable Judge Lani Opperman of the High Court.

According to the organisers, “The 19th Annual Kovsies First-Year Moot Court Competition not only showcased legal acumen but also exemplified the commitment of the University of the Free State's Faculty of Law to providing transformative experiential learning opportunities for its students.” 

Honourable Judge Lani Opperman at the Supreme Court of Appeal.

Honourable Judge Lani Opperman at the Supreme Court of Appeal.

News Archive

Academic delivers inaugural lecture on South African foreign policy
2007-08-06

 

In her inaugural lecture Prof. Heidi Hudson from the Department of Political Sciences, focused on the impact that Pan-Africanist sentiments have had on South Africa’s foreign policy. She also put the resulting contradictions and ambiguities into context. At her inaugural lecture were, from the left: Proff. Frederick Fourie (Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the UFS), Heidi Hudson, Engela Pretorius (Vice-Dean: Faculty of The Humanities) and Daan Wessels (Research Associate in the Department of Political Science).
Photo: Stephen Collett

Academic delivers inaugural lecture on South African foreign policy

“We are committed to full participation as an equal partner … opposed to any efforts which might seek to project South Africa as some kind of superpower on our continent. … the people of Africa share a common destiny and must therefore … address their challenges … as a united force...” (Mbeki 1998:198-199).

Prof. Heidi Hudson from the Department of Political Science referred to this statement made by president Mbeki (made at the opening of the OAU Conference of Ministers of Information in 1995) when she delivered her inaugural lecture on the topic: South African foreign policy: The politics of Pan-Africanism and pragmatism.

One of the questions she asked is: “Can the South African state deliver democracy and welfare at home while simultaneously creating a stable, rules-based African community?”

She answers: “South Africa needs to reflect more critically and honestly on the dualism inherent in its ideological assumptions regarding relations with Africa. South Africa will always be expected by some to play a leadership role in Africa. At the moment, South Africa’s desire to be liked is hampering its role as leader of the continent.”

In her lecture she highlighted the ideological underpinnings and manifestations of South Africa’s foreign policy. Throughout she alluded to the risks associated with single-mindedly following an ideologically driven foreign policy. She emphasised that domestic or national interests are the victims in this process.

Prof. Hudson offers three broad options for South Africa to consider:

  • The Predator – the selfish bully promoting South African economic interest.
  • Mr Nice Guy – the non-hegemonic partner of the African boys club, multilaterally pursuing a pivotal but not dominant role.
  • The Hegemon - South Africa driving regional integration according to its values and favouring some African countries over others, and with checks and balances by civil society.

She chooses option three of hegemony. “Politically correct research views hegemony as bad and partnership as good. This is a romanticised notion – the two are not mutually exclusive,” she said.

However, she states that there have to be prerequisites to control the exercise of power. “The promotion of a counter-hegemon, such as Nigeria, is necessary. Nigeria has been more effective in some respects than South Africa in establishing its leadership, particularly in West Africa. Also needed is that government should be checked by civil society to avoid it sinking into authoritarianism. The case of business and labour coming to an agreement over the HIV/Aids issue is a positive example which illustrates that government cannot ignore civil society. But much more needs to be done in this regard. South Africa must also be very careful in how it uses its aid and should focus potential aid and development projects more explicitly in terms of promoting political stability,” she said.

Prof. Hudson said: “It is also questionable whether Mbeki’s Afro-centrism has in fact promoted the interests of ordinary citizens across Africa. Instead, elite interests in some countries have benefited. But ultimately, the single most important cost is the damage done to the moral code and ethical principles on which the South African Constitution and democracy is founded.

“In the end we all lose out. More pragmatism and less ideology in our relations within Africa may just be what are needed,” she said.

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