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

“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