Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
13 August 2025 | Story Tshepo Tsotetsi | Photo Stephen Collett
Moot Court
The Law Clinic in the Faculty of Law at the University of the Free State (UFS) hosted the 20th annual Kovsie Moot Court Competition from 4 to 6 August 2025.

The Law Clinic in the Faculty of Law at the University of the Free State (UFS) recently hosted the 20th annual Kovsie Moot Court Competition, which brings together first-year law students from across Southern Africa. The competition took place from 4 to 6 August 2025 at the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) in Bloemfontein, offering students the rare opportunity to present arguments in one of the country’s highest courts.

Participating institutions included Eduvos (Bloemfontein Campus), the University of Johannesburg, Rhodes University, and the National University of Lesotho, among others. 

 

Moot Court as a culture and a foundation

Pinky Mokemane, Moot Court Coordinator at UFS, described the competition as far more than an event. “Moot Court is a culture. It brings to life everything students have been studying. They are not just reading theory – they are applying it, speaking it, and defending it,” she said.

Over 200 first-year LLB students signed up to participate in this year’s internal selection process, and three – Niniwe Rens, Kabelo Mokhotla, and Sfiso Mbasela – were ultimately selected to represent UFS. Mokemane said being able to argue legal points in the SCA is a privilege no other university currently offers, and students should not take this opportunity for granted.

Legal Behemoth, a UFS student association that works closely with the Law Clinic to promote a strong moot culture at the university, was a critical force behind the success of this year’s Moot Court programme. The group plays a central role in planning the competition – training students, liaising with legal professionals, and teaching foundational advocacy skills from scratch.

Lethabo Lekhuleng, Chairperson of Legal Behemoth, explained that the group’s support starts long before the competition itself. “We begin by training the students from the ground up. Most of them don’t know anything about oral advocacy or courtroom procedure. So we guide them, give direction, and help them build confidence step by step,” she said.

Describing the students’ growth over the course of the competition, she added, “It was definitely the confidence [that grew]. From the first round to the final round, they became far surer of themselves in how they spoke, how they presented arguments, and how they carried themselves in court.”

Herman du Randt, a senior associate at PH Attorneys and a UFS alumnus, was one of the judges presiding over the competition. “We were looking for confidence. A student must show that they trust themselves and know their arguments. It is not only what you say, but why you say it, and the legal authority behind it,” he explained. 

Du Randt was deeply impressed, describing the students’ overall performance as “breathtaking”. “The amount of effort they put in, the depth of their research, and the clarity of their arguments was exceptional,” he said.

He also emphasised the importance of such competitions in shaping the future of legal professionals. Drawing from his experience of representing UFS internationally through Moot Court, he said, “There are thousands of students graduating with LLBs every year. You need something that makes you stand out. Moot Court is one of the most exposure-rich things you can do as a student. If you don’t take part, you miss a huge opportunity.”

 

Growth through experience: voices from the court floor

Rens and Mokhotla spoke candidly about their experience. “It was hectic. There were sleepless nights, a lot of preparation. But it was all worth it,” Rens said. Both students want to become advocates, and for them, presenting arguments in the SCA was a glimpse into their future.

Mokhotla reflected on what the experience taught her about herself: “I am not defined by failure. The fact that I stood in that court and saw my name there already meant so much. It was nerve-wracking, but I pushed myself to the limit – and that’s what I’ll take with me.”

Christopher Rawson, Acting Director of the UFS Legal Clinic, placed this year’s Moot Court effort within a broader educational vision. “The UFS Law Clinic plays a unique role in integrating practical legal education into the formal curriculum. The clinic hosts the competition and facilitates access to real-world and professionally relevant experiences in a court that is steeped in constitutional history, intellectual rigour, and the pursuit of justice. By doing so, the competition also supports the UFS’s Vision 130 commitments to producing graduates who are socially engaged, ethically grounded, and professionally competent,” he said.

Rawson also noted that early exposure to legal reasoning and oral argument builds the analytical and ethical foundation that students need. “From their initial submissions to their final oral arguments, the growth shown by our students reflects the strength of our approach – combining academic knowledge with skills-based learning and mentorship.”

Through its 20th edition, the Kovsie Moot Court Competition once again demonstrated that legal education at UFS is not confined to lecture halls. 

News Archive

SA universities are becoming the battlegrounds for political gain
2010-11-02

Prof. Kalie Strydom.

No worthwhile contribution can be made to higher education excellence if you do not understand and acknowledge the devastating, but unfortunately unavoidable role of party politics in the system and universities of higher education and training (HET).

This statement was made by Prof. Kalie Strydom during his valedictory lecture made on the Main Campus of the University of the Free State (UFS) in Bloemfontein recently.

Prof. Strydom, who was awarded an Honorary Doctorate by the UFS in 2010, presented a lecture on the theme: The Long Walk to Higher Education and Training Excellence: The Struggle of Comrades and Racists. He provided perspectives on politics in higher education and training (HET) and shared different examples explaining the meaning of excellence in HET in relation to politics.

“At the HET systems level I was fortunate to participate in the deliberations in the early nineties to prepare policy perspectives that could be used by the ANC in HET policy making after the 1994 elections.  At these deliberations one of the important issues discussed was the typical educational and training pyramid recognised in many countries, to establish and maintain successful education and training. The educational pyramid in successful countries was compared to the SA “inverted” pyramid that had already originated during apartheid for all races, but unfortunately exploded during the 16 years of democracy to a dangerous situation of 3 million out-of school and post-school youth with very few education and training opportunities,” he said.

In his lecture, Prof. Strydom answered questions like: Why could we as higher educationists not persuade the new democratically elected government to create a successful education and training pyramid with a strong intermediate college sector in the nineties?  What was the politics like in the early and late nineties about disallowing the acceptance of the successful pyramid of education and training?  Why do we only now in the latest DHET strategic planning 2010–2015 have this successful pyramid as a basis for policymaking and planning?

At an institutional level he explained the role of politics by referring to the Reitz incident at the UFS and the infamous Soudien report on racism in higher education in South Africa highlighting explosive racial situations in our universities and the country.  “To understand this situation we need to acknowledge that we are battling with complex biases influencing the racial situation,” he said.

“White and black, staff and students at our universities are constantly battling with the legacy of the past which is being used, abused and conveniently forgotten, as well as critical events that white and black experience every day of their lives, feeding polarisation of extreme views while eroding common ground.  Examples vary from the indoctrination and prejudice that is continued within most homes, churches and schools; mass media full of murder, rape, corruption; political parties skewing difficult issues for indiscrete political gain; to frustrating non-delivery in almost all spheres of life which frustrates and irritates everyone, all feeding racial stereo typing and prejudice,” said Prof. Strydom.

A South African philosopher, Prof. Willie Esterhuyse, recently used the metaphor of an “Elephant in our lounge” to describe the syndrome of racism that is part of the lives of white and black South Africans in very different ways. He indicated that all of us are aware of the elephant, but we choose not to talk about it, an attitude described by Ruth Frankenberg as ‘colour evasiveness’, which denies the nature and scope of the problem.

Constructs related to race are so contentious that most stakeholders and role-players are unwilling to confront the meanings that they assign to very prominent dimensions of their experience; neither does management at the institutions have enough staff (higher educationists?) with the competencies to interrogate these meanings, or generate shared meanings amongst staff and students (common ground).  A good example that could be compared with “the elephant in our lounge” remark is the recent paper of Prof. Jonathan Jansen, Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the UFS on race categorisation in education and training.

According to Prof. Strydom, universities in South Africa are increasingly becoming the battlegrounds for political gain which creates a polarised atmosphere on campuses and crowds out the moderate middle ground, thereby subverting the role and function of the university as an institution within a specific context, interpreted globally and locally. 

Striving for excellence, mostly free from the negative influences of politics, in HET, from the point of view of the higher educationist, is that we should, through comparative literature review and research, re-conceptualise the university as an institution in a specific context.  This entails carefully considering environment and the positioning of the university leading to a specific institutional culture and recognising the fact that institutional cultures are complicated by many subcultures in academe (faculties) and student life (residences/new generations of commuter students).

Another way forward in striving for excellence, mostly free from politics, is to ensure that we understand the complexities of governing a university better.  D.W. Leslie (2003) mentions formidable tasks related to governance influenced by politics:

  • Balancing legitimacy and effectiveness.
  • Leading along two dimensions: getting work done and engaging people.
  • Differentiating between formal university structures and the functions of universities as they adapt and evolve.
  • Bridging the divergence between cultural and operational imperatives of the bureaucratic and professional sides of the university.

Prof. Strydom concluded by stating that it is possible to continue with an almost never ending list of important themes in HE studies adding perspectives on why it is so easy to misuse universities for politics instead of recognising our responsibility to carefully consider contributions to transformation in such an immensely complicated institution as the university within a higher education and training system. 

Media Release
Issued by: Lacea Loader
Director: Strategic Communication (acting)
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl@ufs.ac.za
29 October 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