Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
07 March 2024 Photo SUPPLIED
Gcina Mtengwane teaches in the Community Development Programme at the Centre for Gender and Africa Studies, University of the Free State, Qwaqwa Campus.

Opinion article by Gcina Mtengwane, Centre for Gender and Africa Studies, University of the Free State.


The notion that 2024 could echo the transformative spirit of 1994 holds weight. South Africans find themselves in a pressing need for positive social, economic, and political change. Yet, the avenue through which this change will manifest - a reformed African National Congress (ANC), an opposition party or a coalition government - remains unchartered territory. South Africa is on a downward trajectory. As various international indexes project corruption and poor governance, noting also that those indexes may not at times be accurate, the lived experiences of South Africans echo despair, disillusionment, and a betrayal of promises for a better life, particularly among the working class and the poor. 

The first democratic election in 1994 heralded an era where a new government had the opportunity to represent the interests and aspirations of all citizens, countering the discriminatory policies of apartheid. It fostered optimism for equal access to opportunities and life chances regardless of race, religion, gender, class, or ethnicity.

However, the transition to democracy, like any new venture, brought forth both opportunities and challenges. Actualising the vision of a ‘rainbow nation’ necessitated tangible legislative reforms and macroeconomic strategies beyond mere rhetoric. Consequently, initiatives such as the Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) in 1994, the Growth, Employment and Redistribution (GEAR) strategy in 1996, The Accelerated and Shared Growth Initiative for South Africa (ASGISA) in 2005, the new Growth Path in 2010, and the National Development Plan vision 2030 were implemented. While the efficacy of these macroeconomic frameworks remains contested, there is a consensus that more can be done and perhaps differently.

Parallels between 2024 and 1994? 

South Africa grapples with high unemployment, alarming crime rates, and an education system ranked among the world’s worst. South Africa is among the most unsafe countries in the world with an estimate of 27 494 murders recorded in 2022-2023. Ranked at 50th out of 63 countries, its education system is rated among the worst performing in the world. The education system fails to equip matriculants with practical skills for sustainable livelihoods. Additionally, funding exclusions and high dropout rates plague higher education, exacerbating the crisis. NSFAS has proposed defunding certain qualifications from its budget and half of those who do make it to universities drop out in their first year.  Moreover, South Africa measures the highest income inequality in the world, with a Gini coefficient of around 0.67, race being a key factor in a society where 10 per cent of the population owns more than 80 per cent of the wealth.

Persistent income inequality and deeply entrenched racial disparities are hindering the opportunities for upward social and economic mobility for the majority, notably the youth. The unemployment rate among youth, which includes persons between 15 and 35 years old, is around 60%. There is low support for and a high failure rate of start-up small to medium enterprises (SMMEs) with between 70% to 80% failing in the first five years of operations. There is a high rate of youth neither in employment nor in education or training (NEETs).  Data shows that 32.6% of graduates struggle to find work within the first two years of graduation, implying that for some, regardless of educational attainment, there is no optimism regarding the prospects for a better future.

The issues highlighted above are just some of the issues facing South Africa. These challenges underscore the urgent need for well-conceived and actionable solutions. A governing party must demonstrate clear policy direction and effective implementation mechanisms to uplift the most vulnerable while safeguarding the rights of all citizens, irrespective of race. However, certain radical policy proposals, like affirmative action and land expropriation without compensation, pose significant ideological divides.

Opportunity to nurture democracy

South Africa boasts over 30 years of democratic experience, providing invaluable lessons from past elections. There is a unique opportunity to nurture democracy and freedom, as is enshrined in the constitution, ensuring the well-being of current and future generations. The prospect of a coalition government looms large, potentially marking a historic shift. While unprecedented at the national level, coalition governance has been trialled in various municipalities including Johannesburg, Nelson Mandela Bay, and Ekurhuleni. However, these experiments often resulted in governance failures, characterised by instability and policy dissonance, rather than cohesive leadership. Political rivalry among the parties undermined service delivery and good governance, leading to the failure of coalition governance at the local government level.

Policy misalignment emerges as the key impediment to coalition success. The recent formation of the ‘Moon-shot pact’ underscores the necessity for aligned policy positions among coalition partners to avert governance crises.

Voter implications

Voting entails entrusting a political party with the responsibility to serve the interests of millions. It demands an informed understanding of the party’s policies as outlined in its manifesto. While individual charisma may sway voter preferences, informed decisions are imperative amidst South Africa’s challenges and opportunities. 

News Archive

The UFS issues a statement regarding the outcome of recent court case
2014-09-15

A significant number of reports appeared in the media the past week regarding this alleged attack, which happened on the Bloemfontein Campus of the UFS on 17 February 2014.

Although the senior leadership of the UFS is always in favour of good and objective journalism, we find it unfortunate that some of the facts are reported in a misleading and/or inaccurate way by some of the local media.

It is important to us that the true facts are stated. Not only for the sake of those involved, but also for our staff, students, alumni and other important stakeholders.

Here are the facts:

1.    The university was not the complainant. The alleged incident was reported to the South African Police Service (SAPS) by the victim, Muzi Gwebu, and the charges were laid by the State.

2.    At no point did the university management in any of its public statements describe this incident as a case of racism; not once. Charges of racism, then and now, must be proven, not assumed to be true simply because someone alleges racism. That is our standard approach, then and now.

3.    Cobus Muller and Charl Blom were suspended by the university, not expelled – pending the results of the court case. Emotions were running high among members of the student body and, on grounds of the evidence available to the university management at the time, as well as concerns for student and campus safety, they were suspended pending the outcome of a court hearing. This is normal procedure. Suspension does not mean you are guilty; it means you have a case to answer, either according to the university's disciplinary procedures or in the courts. For these reasons the university management will not apologise for the suspension.

4.    The university awaited the outcome of the court case before deciding whether disciplinary action should also be taken against Cobus Muller and Charl Blom. In the light of both the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) and the Regional Court rulings, the university management subsequently decided to lift the suspensions of both Muller and Blom from all campuses of the university with immediate effect.

Muzi Gwebu laid serious charges with the SAPS almost immediately after the incident, and the university management believed, on the evidence then available, that the students had a case to answer.
 
5.    As the Director of Public Prosecutions decides on who will be prosecuted and who not, there are no grounds for the university to pay the legal fees of any of the students in this case.
 
Finally:
The University of the Free State will not be fazed by inaccurate and distorted information, rumour and exaggerations. We are still striving to become a truly excellent university, with a focus on the academic, but also the human development of our students.

Issued by: Lacea Loader (Director: Communication and Brand Management)
Tel: +27 (0) 51 401 2584 | +27 (0) 83 645 2454
E-mail: news@ufs.ac.za

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