Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
17 June 2025 | Story Tshepo Tsotetsi | Photo Supplied
Dr Herkulaas Combrink
Dr Herkulaas Combrink is representing UFS in a new international research project that aims to improve how evidence is used in public health policymaking.

Dr Herkulaas Combrink, a senior lecturer in the Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences (EMS) at the University of the Free State (UFS), is representing the university in a new international research project that aims to improve how evidence is used in public health policymaking.

Dr Combrink, who is also a co-director of the Interdisciplinary Centre for Digital Futures (ICDF), has been selected as one of the principal investigators in a newly funded project supported by the UK’s International Science Partnerships Fund under the Evidence-Informed Policymaking Programme. Running from April 2025 to March 2026, the project – titled Integrating Evidence for Contextualised Public Health Policy: Lessons from South Africa – explores how different types of evidence can be used more effectively in shaping public health policy. The international collaboration includes researchers from the Centre for Philosophy of Epidemiology, Medicine and Public Health, which is a collaboration between Durham University and the University of Johannesburg; as well as Durham’s Centre for Humanities Engaging Science and Society.

 

From the Free State to global impact

For Dr Combrink, being part of this collaboration highlights the important work being done in the faculty and ICDF that is reaching beyond borders. 

“It’s important to showcase the impact we are making from the Free State that leads to global outcomes,” he said.

The project aims to evaluate an evidence mapping framework to determine how model-based projections and social listening reports can be more effectively integrated and contextualised for policymaking.

“These are two very different data types,” he explained. “The value lies in demonstrating how to apply the framework to different contexts for evidence-based mapping.”

Dr Combrink brings extensive expertise to the team, having worked on both disease modelling and risk communication during South Africa’s COVID-19 response. He was involved in national and provincial social listening initiatives, and used high-frequency social media data to track the spread of misinformation, often referred to as the ‘infodemic.’ 

“We’ve built up enough data within ICDF and EMS to support this study,” he noted.

The goal is not just theoretical. A key outcome of the project is engaging directly with policymakers to refine modelling and risk communication strategies for future pandemics. 

“This will help us to engage with the various departments of health to assist with improving modelling and risk communication work for better social behavioural change,” he explained.

According to Prof Brownhilder Neneh, Vice-Dean for Research and Internationalisation in the EMS faculty, the project reflects the faculty’s growing global presence. 

“Dr Combrink’s participation is a testament to the calibre of scholarship within the faculty,” she said. “It positions EMS as a key contributor to shaping policy and practice with societal impact.”

She added that the collaboration aligns well with the faculty’s vision for global partnerships that are rooted in local relevance.

“By focusing on contextualised evidence for policymaking, this project reflects our commitment to relevance, engagement and global partnership,” she said.

 

What comes next

Over the project’s 12-month timeline, the team will deliver:

• a case study analysis of modelling and social listening during South Africa’s COVID-19 response;
• an extended evidence mapping framework tailored to diverse evidence types;
• policy briefs and practical tools for public health practitioners; and
• a hybrid international workshop in late 2025 bringing together researchers, policymakers and health professionals to test and refine these outputs.

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