Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
17 October 2024 | Story André Damons | Photo Supplied
Dr Mutshidzi Mulondo
Dr Mutshidzi Mulondo, academic in the Division of Public Health within the Faculty of Health Sciences at UFS.

Dr Mutshidzi Mulondo, an academic in the Division of Public Health within the Faculty of Health Sciences, at the University of the Free State (UFS), has won a prestigious Global Health Award at the margins of the Global Health Summit in London, the UK.

Dr Mulondo, who is a Novartis Reimagining Healthcare Scholar and a Visiting Scholar at the Beaver College of Health Sciences at Appalachian State University, in the US, was a finalist in two categories: ‘Mental Health and Well-being’ and ‘Rising Star’. She won the Zenith Global Health Award under the category ‘Mental Health and Well-being’. The awards ceremony took place on 28 September and saw health professionals and academics gather in Europe for the auspicious occasion.

“This nomination and selection are an honour that bears testament to my dedication and commitment to SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being). I hope this win serves as inspiration to young people, particularly to young women in academia and in the sciences,” says Dr Mulondo. The awards are an esteemed platform renowned for celebrating global recognition and excellence, fostering collaboration and innovation in the healthcare sector. They further serve as recognition for contributions made through education, research and/or technology and innovation.

Eco-anxiety

Dr Mulondo, who was invited to attend the summit for the first time, joined a panel of speakers on the session theme ‘mental health and climate change’ where she shared insights on eco-anxiety – the intersection of climate change and mental health which was coined by Albrecht as the chronic fear of environmental change.

Research by the McKinsey Health Institute, says Dr Mulondo, a fellow of the UFS Emerging Scholar Accelerator Programme (ESAP) and member of the UNESCO AG for Women in Science, indicates that more than 75% of young people are pessimistic about the future due to climate change. Most young people in the activism frontlines experience activist burn-out from consistent campaigning, while others experience eco-gaslighting from those who feel climate change is a non-issue. These negative emotions are further exacerbated by young people’s exposure to social media of constant images and conversations about environmental degradation due to climate change.

Pact for the future

Dr Mulondo flew to London from New York after participating in the 79th United Nations General Assembly’s Summit of the Future and Science Summit, as well as the New York Climate Week. She further provided insights into the adoption of the Pact for the Future which was adopted during the Summit of the Future. “With only 17% of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) targets on track to be achieved by 2030, 18% stagnant and 17% regressed to pre-2015 when the goals were first adopted (SDG Report 2024), Mental Health still remains among 10 global health issues to track according to the World Health Organisation (WHO),” says Dr Mulondo.

“The Summit of the Future, which is regarded as a once-in-a-generation high-level event,” she continues, “was aimed at establishing a new global consensus to safeguard the present and future generations. Current challenges such as health pandemics, political unrest, and climatic changes were factored into discussions to keep apace with the changing world in the adoption of the Pact for the Future”.

Recommendations and mitigation efforts should focus on encouraging those experiencing eco-anxiety to focus on joining collective action efforts (i.e. campaigns to clean ocean and beach environments (etc,) so that they feel they are doing something towards saving the planet. “This will help alleviate the feelings of ‘hopelessness’ which some experience from not knowing what to do about the environmental degradation. Furthermore, intergenerational collaboration is necessary for young people to voice their concerns and innovative ideas on the issue, while the older generation listens and further shares their lived wisdom. Ultimately, collective support (Ubuntu) is what is needed as part of the mitigation efforts,” concludes Dr Mulondo.

News Archive

“To forgive is not an obligation. It’s a choice.” – Prof Minow during Reconciliation Lecture
2014-03-05

“To forgive is not an obligation. It’s a choice.” – Prof Minow during the Third Annual Reconciliation Lecture entitled Forgiveness, Law and Justice.
Photo: Johan Roux

No one could have anticipated the atmosphere in which Prof Martha Minow would visit the Bloemfontein Campus. And no one could have predicted how apt the timing of her message would be. As this formidable Dean of Harvard University’s Law School stepped behind the podium, a latent tension edged through the crowded audience.

“The issue of getting along after conflict is urgent.”

With these few words, Prof Minow exposed the essence of not only her lecture, but also the central concern of the entire university community.

As an expert on issues surrounding racial justice, Prof Minow has worked across the globe in post-conflict societies. How can we prevent atrocities from happening? she asked. Her answer was an honest, “I don’t know.” What she is certain of, on the other hand, is that the usual practice of either silence or retribution does not work. “I think that silence produces rage – understandably – and retribution produces the cycle of violence. Rather than ignoring what happens, rather than retribution, it would be good to reach for something more.” This is where reconciliation comes in.

Prof Minow put forward the idea that forgiveness should accompany reconciliation efforts. She defined forgiveness as a conscious, deliberate decision to forego rightful grounds of resentment towards those who have committed a wrong. “To forgive then, in this definition, is not an obligation. It’s a choice. And it’s held by the one who was harmed,” she explained.

Letting go of resentment cannot be forced – not even by the law. What the law can do, though, is either to encourage or discourage forgiveness. Prof Minow showed how the law can construct adversarial processes that render forgiveness less likely, when indeed its intention was the opposite. “Or, law can give people chances to meet together in spaces where they may apologise and they may forgive,” she continued. This point introduced some surprising revelations about our Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC).

Indeed, studies do report ambivalence, disappointment and mixed views about the TRC. Whatever our views are on its success, Prof Minow reported that people across the world wonder how South African did it. “It may not work entirely inside the country; outside the country it’s had a huge effect. It’s a touchstone for transitional justice.”

The TRC “seems to have coincided with, and maybe contributed to, the relatively peaceful political transition to democracy that is, frankly, an absolute miracle.” What came as a surprise to many is this: the fact that the TRC has affected transitional justice efforts in forty jurisdictions, including Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Cambodia and Liberia. It has even inspired the creation of a TRC in Greensborough, North Carolina, in the United States.

There are no blueprints for solving conflict, though. “But the possibility of something other than criminal trials, something other than war, something other than silence – that’s why the TRC, I think, has been such an exemplar to the world,” she commended.

Court decision cannot rebuild a society, though. Only individuals can forgive. Only individuals can start with purposeful, daily decisions to forgive and forge a common future. Forgiveness is rather like kindness, she suggested. It’s a resource without limits. It’s not scarce like water or money. It’s within our reach. But if it’s forced, it’s not forgiveness.

“It is good,” Prof Minow warned, “to be cautious about the use of law to deliberately shape or manipulate the feelings of any individual. But it is no less important to admit that law does affect human beings, not just in its results, but in its process.” And then we must take responsibility for how we use that law.

“A government can judge, but only people can forgive.” As Prof Minow’s words lingered, the air suddenly seemed a bit more buoyant.

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