Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
24 February 2025 Photo Supplied
Siyanda Magayana
Siyanda Magayana, Senior Officer: Gender Equality and Anti-Discrimination Office, Unit for Institutional Change and Social Justice, UFS.

Opinion article by Siyanda Magayana, Senior Officer: Gender Equality and Anti-Discrimination Office, Unit for Institutional Change and Social Justice, University of the Free State.

The recent executive order by US President Donald Trump to defund and dismantle Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives is more than just a bureaucratic shift. It is a declaration of whose lives matter and whose do not. Removing DEI initiatives and policies, notably, those that centre on marginalised groups, racial minorities, and LGBTQI+ individuals does not erase their struggles and existence in our society. Instead, it exposes the entrenched unwillingness of power structures to validate and acknowledge these realities. The fact that some leaders feel they can simply ‘tick off’ or ‘untick’ human rights and social justice efforts from policy reveals just how expendable these communities are perceived to be.

We need to be clear, erasure at a systemic level does not translate to actual erasure. Marginalised people such as women, queer individuals, black and brown individuals, disabled people will continue to exist, resist, and demand their space, regardless of this order. The removal of systemic and/or institutional recognition and support does not make discrimination disappear. Instead, it amplifies their oppression by stripping away their right to exist, and legal protections that have been fought for, for decades. We cannot have one person deciding to erase the fight of numerous people in just a matter of weeks.

These policies and initiatives were primarily designed to address systemic inequalities and create spaces where historically marginalised groups could thrive. These initiatives of redress were not just for the benefit of the marginalised only, they were for everyone. Therefore, the dismantling of these initiatives will perpetuate and recreate unjust and unequal environments for all.

What is the impact for the Global South?

It is almost tempting to think that the dismantling of DEI initiatives in the US is an isolated issue with no direct impact on our realities in the Global South. However, that assumption is both naïve and dangerous. The ripple effects of regressive policies and initiatives in powerful nations often influences global attitudes, social narratives, and funding. The move by the US devalues global perceptions and the importance of having DEI initiatives in, and for other governments; and there is a possibility of these institutions disregarding and/or following suit in their own countries.

For black and other racially marginalised communities in the Global South, particularly in Africa, this is alarming. It needs us to ask the question, if major global powerful entities dismantle such initiatives and no longer prioritise DEI, what does it mean for marginalised groups and identities within our countries and communities? It reinforces the idea that the oppression of certain groups is not a crisis, but a norm. In the same way, it weakens the push for LGBTQI+ rights, gender equality and racial justice, which are already met with precarious conditions in many countries due to their colonial legacies, systematic inequalities, and conservative cultural norms.

Impact on the diversity of women

The dismantling of DEI policies and initiatives does not only, unfortunately, impact non-normative or those identifying outside of heteronormativity or the gender binary. It also disproportionately affects women, especially those who face intersecting forms of discrimination. For instance, for black women who are already navigating the dual burden of racism and sexism; the dismantling of DEI programmes translates to fewer systemic protections against workplace discrimination, less access to leadership roles, and diminished support for reproductive justice. This extends to women of all races, ethnicities, and backgrounds; no woman is exempt from this decision.

This is even more damaging for non-binary, and trans identities as it reinforces rigid gender norms that limit their autonomy, agency, and expression. It further signals a broader societal regression that undermines the existence and rights of these groups, as well as the progress made towards gender equality and sexual freedom for all.

Men, too, of all races, identities, and backgrounds are affected by the dismantling of DEI initiatives. For instance, black men are already subjected to systemic racism, and as a result of this they are vulnerable to losing economic opportunities and educational equity benefits as initiatives set up to address systemic inequalities. Similarly, the systems that deny trans rights enforce toxic masculinity, thus punishing and discriminating against anyone who deviates from heteropatriarchal and narrow gender norms. As such, white men, for instance, who identify outside of the gender binary and heteronormativity are equally going to be affected.

While it may appear that the dismantling of DEI policy exclusively affects trans individuals and those that identify outside of the gender binary, their removal sets a dangerous precedence for everyone, including cisgender men and women. The erasure of non-normative identities and systems that affirm and acknowledge them are not just about gender identity, but more about controlling how gender is expressed, who gets to belong, and who is deemed worthy of rights and dignity.

“Discrimination Does Not Know Your Postal Address”: Discrimination Against One is Discrimination Against All"

Prejudice can and does affect anyone, anywhere – therefore, it is a dangerous myth that we can selectively uphold human rights. That we can, for instance, advocate for black liberation while turning a blind eye to the struggles of queer, trans and other marginalised groups. That we can rightfully fight for gender equality while remaining silent when non-normative and gender diverse populations’ rights are erased. And similarly, that we can advocate for diversity but only when it is convenient, comfortable, and easy to digest.

It is high time we realise that discrimination is never just directed at a single group, but rather, it is about the broader systems of power we exist in that decide who gets to exist fully and who does not. If these initiatives and support for gender diversity and other minority groups are removed from policy and other critical institutions, then tomorrow, it could be you or any other entity that seemingly no longer fits within the acceptable limits of the norm and/ binary.

The erasure of DEI frameworks and rights of gender diverse persons in the US is not a problem isolated from ours as a collective, it is ours, too. It serves as a warning sign that marginalisation and discrimination is becoming more acceptable, normalised, and institutionalised.

Click to view documentClick here to see other Institutional experts.

News Archive

Legal elite tackle thorny issue of corruption
2013-01-24

 

Our Faculty of Law brought together top experts and judges for a Symposium on Corruption, to investigate one of the most pressing concerns of South Africans.
Photo: Stephen Collett
24 January 2013



   YouTube Video

Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng yesterday (24 January 2013) concluded the proceedings of the first day of the International Symposium on Corruption, hosted by the Faculty of Law of the University of the Free State (UFS). In his address Justice Mogoeng made no excuses as to the magnitude of the threat corruption presents to South African citizens.

“Urgent action and efficient measures are called for to arrest this scourge, for the sake of our constitutional democracy,” he warned. “Our vibrant constitutional democracy will not and cannot survive in the face of rampant corruption.”

Justice Mogoeng said the spate of civil and labour unrest erupting throughout the country can be attributed to corruption. According to him the scope and far-reaching implications of corruption drives South Africans to “boiling point” and evokes “anger, frustration and a don’t-care-attitude that often manifests in widespread protest actions” and disrespect for the rule of law.

“South Africans, irrespective of race or creed, must identify and focus on their common enemies and find a conciliatory and unifying way of dealing with what divides them, including the lingering prejudices of the past,” Justice Mogoeng urged.

Despite the threat corruption poses, he stressed that all South Africans have a role to play in the fight against corruption and that there are different role players that can become involved in the process. Especially important is the media and faith-based agencies which, according to Justice Mogoeng, can regenerate morals and secure a “national moral code.” The State must further ensure enforcement of anti-corruption measures and preside over the selection of individuals of “solid character” to reside in agencies meant to fight corruption.

He highlighted the need for an unbiased and independent judiciary, one immune to outside influences controlled by powerful forces, as well as personal agendas.

Although Justice Mogoeng believes that the private sector is most guilty of transgressions based on corruption, he stated that a “well-coordinated war” against it must be waged in all sectors in order to stamp it out.

Justice Mogoeng presided over the unveiling of the redesigned foyer of the CR Swart Building and praised the Faculty of Law for its innovation with regard to the symposium.

“I look forward with great optimism to more well-organised symposiums that strike at the nerve-centre of the well-being of our constitutional democracy,” he concluded.

Symposium seeks answers and solutions

The Faculty of Law at the University of the Free State (UFS) concluded its International Symposium on Corruption on Friday 25 January 2013. The event featured a stellar cast of speakers, including the Chief Justice of South Africa, three current Supreme Court of Appeal judges, high-court judges, advocates, prosecutors, journalists, as well as local and international legal academics.

Throughout the two-day symposium, corruption was dissected as a severe problem in the South African socio-economic landscape and solutions were sought to alleviate the pressing concern.

The main attractions of the symposium were undoubtedly the attendance and presentations delivered by Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng, as well as Prof. Leon Wessels. Prof. Wessels was described as “one of the founding fathers of the constitution of South Africa” by Judge Fritz Brand, a current Appeal Court judge and the third-longest serving judge in the country.

“Corruption is stealing the constitutional dream of this country. Corrupt leaders are fearless, those who expose corruption, are fearful,” Prof. Wessels warned.

Judge Brand closely trails the second longest serving judge in the country in former Kovsie, as well as former UFS Council Chairman, Judge Faan Hancke. Both judges addressed the symposium and chaired sessions, along with Prof. Johan Henning, Dean of the Faculty of Law, and Judge Ian van der Merwe, Chairman of the UFS Council.

It was, however, not all doom and gloom, as several of the speakers offered tangible ideas in what was often termed the “war on corruption”. Celebrated Sunday Times journalist Mzilikazi wa Afrika who has been arrested following the police leasing scandal which he exposed, urged South Africans to stand together in their fight against corruption, before it is too late.

People on the front lines in the day to day fight against corruption also spoke at the symposium, giving the audience a better understanding of the intricacies and challenges involved in the process. The Head of the National Prosecuting Authority’s Asset Forfeiture Unit, Mr Willie Hofmeyer, as well as Advocate Xolisile Khanyile, who is the Director of Public Prosecutions in the Free State, elucidated this struggle.

The symposium also hosted Prof. Chizu Makajima, a celebrated academic from the United Kingdom.

The two-day symposium ended in style as the delegates gathered in the Centenary Hall on the Bloemfontein Campus for lunch, with a further address by Prof. Leon Wessels


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