Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
28 May 2024 Photo Supplied
Dr Ina Gouws
Dr Ina Gouws is Senior Lecturer: Programme: Governance and Political Transformation, Department of Political Studies and Governance, University of the Free State.

Opinion article by Dr Ina Gouws, Senior Lecturer: Programme: Governance and Political Transformation, Department of Political Studies and Governance, University of the Free State.

Community-based governance refers to the systems and processes involved in the interface between community participation, community engagement, and public sector decision-making. This requires a partnership between civil society, business, and government. For this partnership to work, all partners must commit and invest in these processes for the sake of better services to communities. In recent years, communities have had to approach community-based governance with regional and local governments as mostly absent partners.

As South Africa approaches the national and provincial elections this week, voters need to reflect on the indispensable role civil society organisations have assumed in bridging the governance gap left by ineffective local and provincial governments. These organisations, driven by a profound commitment to community welfare, have extended their reach beyond their designated mandates, skillsets, and financial capacities to address pressing community needs. Their tireless efforts have underscored the significance of community-based governance and the urgent need for collaboration between civil society and government institutions.

Embracing community-based governance

In most provinces across South Africa, communities have found themselves grappling with the consequences of governance failures, ranging from inadequate service delivery to systemic corruption. Faced with these challenges, civil society organisations have emerged as beacons of hope, leveraging their grassroots networks and intimate understanding of local dynamics to deliver essential services, advocate for change, and empower communities.

However, the burden should not fall solely on the shoulders of civil society. As the nation prepares for a new phase of post-election governance, incoming national and provincial governments must acknowledge and appreciate the pivotal role played by these organisations. They must recognise the wealth of expertise, connections, and trust that civil society brings to the table.  By rebuilding the fractured relationship between government and communities, which is fundamental to effective community-based governance, a collaborative approach is therefore required. Moreover, governments must move beyond mere acknowledgement and actively engage with civil society organisations as equal partners in the pursuit of sustainable development and social justice. This entails fostering open channels of communication, soliciting input from communities and civil society in policy formulation and decision-making processes, and allocating and then PROVIDING resources to support the initiatives and projects driven by these organisations.

By embracing community-based governance and forging genuine partnerships with civil society, provincial governments can tap into a valuable reservoir of knowledge and experience that is essential to addressing the complex challenges facing South African society. Together, they can work towards a future where governance is not just about top-down directives, but is rooted in the principles of inclusivity, responsiveness, and accountability. South Africans are not experiencing such partnerships at all in most provinces. Voters MUST reflect on this before they cast their votes.

Reimagine governance in South Africa

Voters must not forget the impact an ineffective national and provincial government has had on their communities. We must vote with the expectation that our national government's ultimate goal must be to ensure that communities at the grassroots level receive the services and support they need for the people living there to thrive. This includes providing essential utility services such as water, electricity, and sanitation; social services such as health care, education, and welfare; and fostering economic growth through investment towards job creation and infrastructure development.

Provincial governments are supposed to play a crucial intermediary role by bringing national objectives to the regional level, tailoring strategies and policies to the specific needs and circumstances of their areas. They therefore set the tone for local governance, and by extension, community-based governance, by interpreting national policies and ensuring their implementation in a way that addresses local priorities. South Africans have not experienced this level of good governance in recent years; some never have.

So, if this interpretation and implementation does not happen – which is the case in most provinces – the tone set for community-based governance is one of disarray, failure, and suffering. There are of course a few cases that are the exception.  South African voters can change this by voting for a national and provincial government that will impact communities in constructive ways and pave the way for the local government elections to follow.

We are on the cusp of a new electoral cycle. As voters, we must seize this opportunity to reimagine governance in South Africa – governance that puts the needs and aspirations of communities at its core, nurtures collaboration between government and civil society, and paves the way for a more equitable and prosperous future for all. With this vision, we can truly realise the promise of democracy and ensure that no community is left behind. These may be national and provincial elections, but you are voting for your community!

News Archive

Stem cell research and human cloning: legal and ethical focal points
2004-07-29

   

(Summary of the inaugural lecture of Prof Hennie Oosthuizen, from the Department of Criminal and Medical Law at the Faculty of Law of the University of the Free State.)

 

In the light of stem cell research, research on embryo’s and human cloning it will be fatal for legal advisors and researchers in South Africa to ignore the benefits that new bio-medical development, through research, contain for this country.

Legal advisors across the world have various views on stem cell research and human cloning. In the USA there is no legislation that regulates stem cell research but a number of States adopted legislation that approves stem cell research. The British Parlement gave permission for research on embryonic stem cells, but determined that it must be monitored closely and the European Union is of the opinion that it will open a door for race purification and commercial exploitation of human beings.

In South Africa the Bill on National Health makes provision for therapeutical and non therapeutical research. It also makes provision for therapeutical embryonical stem cell research on fetuses, which is not older than 14 days, as well as for therapeutical cloning under certain circumstances subject to the approval of the Minister. The Bill prohibits reproductive cloning.

Research on human embrio’s is a very controversial issue, here and in the rest of the world.

Researchers believe that the use of stem cell therapy could help to side-step the rejection of newly transplanted organs and tissue and if a bank for stem cell could be built, the shortage of organs for transplants would become something of the past. Stem cells could also be used for healing of Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and spinal injuries.

Sources from which stem cells are obtained could also lead to further ethical issues. Stem cells are harvested from mature human cells and embryonic stem cells. Another source to be utilised is to take egg cells from the ovaries of aborted fetuses. This will be morally unacceptable for those against abortions. Linking a financial incentive to that could become more of a controversial issue because the woman’s decision to abort could be influenced. The ideal would be to rather use human fetus tissue from spontaneous abortions or extra-uterine pregnancies than induced abortions.

The potential to obtain stem cells from the blood of the umbilical cord, bone-marrow and fetus tissue and for these cells to arrange themselves is known for quite some time. Blood from the umbilical cord contains many stem cells, which is the origin of the body’s immune and blood system. It is beneficial to bank the blood of a newborn baby’s umbilical cord. Through stem cell transplants the baby or another family member’s life could be saved from future illnesses such as anemia, leukemia and metabolic storing disabilities as well as certain generic immuno disabilities.

The possibility to withdraw stem cells from human embrio’s and to grow them is more useable because it has more treatment possibilities.

With the birth of Dolly the sheep, communities strongly expressed their concern about the possibility that a new cloning technique such as the replacement of the core of a cell will be used in human reproduction. Embryonic splitting and core replacement are two well known techniques that are associated with the cloning process.

I differentiate between reproductive cloning – to create a cloned human embryo with the aim to bring about a pregnancy of a child that is identical to another individual – and therapeutically cloning – to create a cloned human embryo for research purposes and for healing human illnesses.

Worldwide people are debating whether to proceed with therapeutical cloning. There are people for and against it. The biggest ethical objection against therapeutical cloning is the termination of the development of a potential human being.

Children born from cloning will differ from each other. Factors such as the uterus environment and the environment in which the child is growing up will play a role. Cloning create unique children that will grow up to be unique individuals, just like me and you that will develop into a person, just like you and me. If we understand this scientific fact, most arguments against human cloning will disappear.

Infertility can be treated through in vitro conception. This process does not work for everyone. For some cloning is a revolutionary treatment method because it is the only method that does not require patients to produce sperm and egg cells. The same arguments that were used against in vitro conception in the past are now being used against cloning. It is years later and in vitro cloning is generally applied and accepted by society. I am of the opinion that the same will happen with regard to human cloning.

There is an argument that cloning must be prohibited because it is unsafe. Distorted ideas in this regard were proven wrong. Are these distorted ideas justified to question the safety of cloning and the cloning process you may ask. The answer, according to me, is a definite no. Human cloning does have many advantages. That includes assistance with infertility, prevention of Down Syndrome and recovery from leukemia.

 

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