Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
13 March 2024 Photo Sonia Small
Prof Sethulego Matebesi
Prof Sethulego Matebesi is an Associate Professor and Academic Head of Department of Sociology at the University of the Free State.

Opinion article by Prof Sethulego Matebesi, Associate Professor and Academic Head of Department of Sociology, University of the Free State.


There was a time when weekly news coverage of South Africa was dominated by various forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance incidents that painted a grim picture of respect for human rights

However, in the history of contemporary South Africa there has been plenty of optimism about the prospect of deepening the understanding of human rights in order to entrench a human rights culture among citizens. This optimism is underscored by a range of deliberate actions by the South African government to promote, protect, and monitor the development and observance of human rights through, for example, the South African Human Rights Commission and the Commission for Gender Equality.

Yet, while these institutions – and many other policy instruments to ensure compliance – are central to creating an environment conducive to advancing rights enshrined in the Bill of Rights, citizens also hold significant responsibility to prevent the escalation of discrimination and racial tension. But many of us face an uncomfortable truth we have become accustomed to avoiding: the ability to show unusual restraint in the face of injustice.

The challenge of combating practices that glorify intolerance

Beyond formal political rights, human rights also entail the progressive realisation of the right to the structural social determinants of well-being, such as access to clean water, food, and a healthy environment. However, while the process of social change in South Africa has many unique attributes, the response to the process reflects two extremes.

There are, on the one hand, those who cultivate an image as defenders of the rights of the ‘oppressed’ and are predominantly black activists, and on the other hand, anti-transformation forces who stall the move of the country towards a more inclusive and egalitarian future and are primarily white activists. These activists, whether advancing the reclamation of rights, perpetuate legacies of the past instead of asserting a positive commitment to eradicating socially constructed barriers to equality.

These activists are found everywhere. They are part of our education, religious, political, and social establishments. Reflecting on the painful past of the country, these activists do not help foster diversity as an ethos but advance the conscious and unconscious practices of structural racism. Aided by hyper-personalised social media feeds, these activists can stretch the boundaries of logic and destabilise fragile and established democratic and human rights.

The problem, they claim, is that those who embrace diversity and want to find amicable solutions to longstanding social injustices are either advocates of white supremacy or want to abrogate their right to freedom of expression. In such cases, when people in a hate frenzy find something to hate together, they become bonded. And anything contrary to their beliefs goes into an echo chamber of mockery. 

I do not want to establish a potentially trivialising affinity with branding activists who assert their rights as an attack on human rights. But attention is drawn to instances where noble objectives to confront the tentacles of human rights abuses have been weaponised against what is perceived as ‘the other.’

But how can we navigate this fundamental societal defect? Collective agency to advance the ethos of human rights

After three decades of democracy, attempts to eliminate systematic and institutionalised under-privilege must be welcomed. Likewise, our response to the perceived threats to efforts to enhance diversity as an ethos in public institutions and society matters. In many instances, when subjugated to hatred, hostility, or even violence, there is a tendency to believe that the best approach to such an absurd situation is more absurdity. At its most benign, such a response is not helpful to efforts to embrace diversity. At its weirdest, it garners public sympathy for hate groups and activists.

While there have been concerted efforts internationally and nationally for the progressive realisation of social rights and efforts to strengthen democratic resilience and rights-respecting societies, South Africans have been passing the buck. Rights-respecting citizens have a choice to make. They can continue to pass the buck or help build a culture where everyone achieves their potential and develops into responsible citizens.

I am convinced that beyond formal politics, the attainment of respect for cultural diversity and professing the freedom, equality, and unity of all peoples are contingent upon our collective activism and shared commitments to these values. This collective approach – although some may view it as illusory – is, in fact, our most potent weapon. Reinforcing its commitment strengthens our collective agency and resolve to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms.

News Archive

UFS gets equipment worth R3,9 million to do doping tests for the World Cup
2010-05-18

One of the new state-of-the-art machines to be used for dope testing.
Photo: Mangaliso Radebe


The South African Doping Control Laboratory (SADoCoL) at the University of the Free State (UFS) in Bloemfontein boasts new state-of-the-art equipment worth R3,9 million with which doping tests for next month’s 2010 FIFA World Cup will be done.

“Our new instruments are some of the best in the world,” said a proud Dr Pieter van der Merwe, Head of the laboratory.

SADoCoL, housed in the Department of Pharmacology at the UFS, has done doping analyses for many international sport events in South Africa and elsewhere in the world, including the 1995 Rugby World Cup and the Sevens Rugby World Cup in Dubai.

“Because of our international recognition and accreditation by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) the laboratory was selected to be the official doping control facility of the 2010 FIFA World Cup,” he said.

“FIFA has entered into a contract with us and they will send all the urine and blood samples for the World Cup to this laboratory. I must hasten to say that it is not only for the World Cup. We will continue with the work that we have been doing all these years regarding doping analysis in South Africa.”

“It is an honour for the Department and the UFS to offer a world-class service to a world-class association like FIFA and to be associated with a tournament of this magnitude.”

Being the only one of its kind in South Africa, and one of only two in Africa (the other being in Tunisia), it is not surprising that FIFA has entered into this partnership with SADoCoL.

“It is a well-known fact that we have been, and still are, the official doping control testing facility in South Africa for many years now. So there is also a lot of African involvement in our laboratory where African countries send samples to us for analysis,” he said.

It is not for the first time, though, that SADoCoL is involved with FIFA. The laboratory did all the testing for the Confederations Cup that was held in South Africa in June 2009.

It had just been extended to accommodate the new equipment. An official viewing session of the new facility was held last week.

Media Release
Issued by: Mangaliso Radebe
Assistant Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2828
Cell: 078 460 3320
E-mail: radebemt@ufs.ac.za  
18 May 2010
 

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