Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
07 May 2024 | Story Valentino Ndaba | Photo Supplied
South African Democracy
Back (from left) Dr Brand Claassen (Head of the Department of Private Law), Dr Jacques Matthee (Vice-dean Faculty of Law), Dr Marianne Sèverin (Institute for African Studies at Bordeaux University, France), Dr Marda Horn, Dr James Faber, Dr Lerato Ngwenyama. Front (from left) Dr Caroline Müller-Van der Westhuizen, Dr Anthea-lee September-Van Huffel and Portia Senokoane.

The University of the Free State’s Department of Private Law in the Faculty of Law recently hosted an enlightening seminar titled 30 years of democracy in South Africa on 26 April 2024. Dr Marianne Sèverin, from the Institute for African Studies at Bordeaux University in France, graced the event with her expertise. Her doctoral research delved into the Political Networking of the African National Congress (ANC), providing a rich backdrop for her discussion on South African democracy with the faculty’s esteemed staff and eager students.

Navigating the adolescent years

In her engaging discourse, Dr Sèverin likened South African democracy to that of “a teenager”, acknowledging the strides made since the advent of democracy in 1994. However, she astutely pointed out that despite the country boasting a robust Constitution, the pervasive issues of corruption and poverty remain significant hurdles. Drawing from her deep knowledge of the ANC, she shed light on the party’s overwhelming dominance in politics, which, unfortunately, provides fertile ground for corrupt practices to flourish unchecked.

The perspective of the ‘born free’ generation

Of particular interest to Dr Sèverin were the perspectives of the young attendees, affectionately known as the ‘Born Free’ generation, who never experienced the apartheid era firsthand. Their casual acceptance of democracy struck a chord with her. Dr Marda Horn, Senior Lecturer in the Department of Private Law noted, “She found through her discussions that they seemed to take democracy for granted and did not appreciate how lucky they were to live in a democracy.”

Lessons from across the continent

Throughout her presentation, Dr Sèverin artfully weaved in anecdotes from other African nations, such as Zimbabwe, Congo-Brazzaville, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, where democracy has faltered. Her passion for South Africa was palpable as she recounted the emotional moment she experienced during the Rugby World Cup in France in 2023 when the national anthem resonated. Expressing her admiration for the ethos of “ubuntu” demonstrated by the Springboks, she confessed that this philosophy has become her guiding principle in life, a testament to the profound impact of South African culture on her.

A call to cherish and safeguard

The seminar provided a platform for deep reflection on the progress and challenges of democracy in South Africa, urging participants to cherish and safeguard the hard-won freedoms of the nation. As South Africa approaches the elections scheduled for 29 May 2024, the seminar serves as a timely reminder of the importance of youth engagement in shaping the country’s democratic future.

News Archive

The failure of the law
2004-06-04

 

Written by Lacea Loader

- Call for the protection of consumers’ and tax payers rights against corporate companies

An expert in commercial law has called for reforms to the Companies Act to protect the rights of consumers and investors.

“Consumers and tax payers are lulled into thinking the law protects them when it definitely does not,” said Prof Dines Gihwala this week during his inaugural lecture at the University of the Free State’s (UFS).

Prof Gihwala, vice-chairperson of the UFS Council, was inaugurated as extraordinary professor in commercial law at the UFS’s Faculty of Law.

He said that consumers, tax payers and shareholders think they can look to the law for an effective curb on the enormous power for ill that big business wields.

“Once the public is involved, the activities of big business must be controlled and regulated. It is the responsibility of the law to oversee and supervise such control and regulation,” said Prof Gihwala.

He said that, when undesirable consequences occur despite laws enacted specifically to prevent such results, it must be fair to suggest that the law has failed.

“The actual perpetrators of the undesirable behaviour seldom pay for it in any sense, not even when criminal conduct is involved. If directors of companies are criminally charged and convicted, the penalty is invariably a fine imposed on the company. So, ironically, it is the money of tax payers that is spent on investigating criminal conduct, formulating charges and ultimately prosecuting the culprits involved in corporate malpractice,” said Prof Gihwala.

According to Prof Gihwala the law continuously fails to hold companies meaningfully accountable to good and honest business values.

“Insider trading is a crime and, although legislation was introduced in 1998 to curb it, not a single successful criminal prosecution has taken place. While the law appears to be offering the public protection against unacceptable business behaviour, it does no such thing – the law cannot act as a deterrent if it is inadequate or not being enforced,” he said.

The government believed it was important to facilitate access to the country’s economic resources by those who had been denied it in the past. The Broad Based Economic Empowerment Act of 2003 (BBEE), is legislation to do just that. “We should be asking ourselves whether it is really possible for an individual, handicapped by the inequities of the past, to compete in the real business world even though the BBEE Act is now part of the law?,” said Prof Gihwala.

Prof Gihwala said that judges prefer to follow precedent instead of taking bold initiative. “Following precedent is safe at a personal level. To do so will elicit no outcry of disapproval and one’s professional reputation is protected. The law needs to evolve and it is the responsibility of the judiciary to see that it happens in an orderly fashion. Courts often take the easy way out, and when the opportunity to be bold and creative presents itself, it is ignored,” he said.

“Perhaps we are expecting too much from the courts. If changes are to be made to the level of protection to the investing public by the law, Parliament must play its proper role. It is desirable for Parliament to be proactive. Those tasked with the responsibility of rewriting our Companies Act should be bold and imaginative. They should remove once and for all those parts of our common law which frustrate the ideals of our Constitution, and in particular those which conflict with the principles of the BBEE Act,” said Prof Gihwala.

According to Prof Gihwala, the following reforms are necessary:

• establishing a unit that is part of the office of the Registrar of Companies to bolster a whole inspectorate in regard to companies’ affairs;
• companies who are liable to pay a fine or fines, should have the right to take action to recover that fine from those responsible for the conduct;
• and serious transgression of the law should allow for imprisonment only – there should be no room for the payment of fines.
 

Prof Gihwala ended the lecture by saying: “If the opportunity to re-work the Companies Act is not grabbed with both hands, we will witness yet another failure in the law. Even more people will come to believe that the law is stupid and that it has made fools of them. And that would be the worst possible news in our developing democracy, where we are struggling to ensure that the Rule of Law prevails and that every one of us has respect for the law”.

 

 

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