Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
17 March 2025 | Story Tshepo Tsotetsi | Photo Charl Devenish
Safety Campus Launch 2025
Vice-Chancellor and Principal Prof Hester C. Klopper, Deputy Minister of Police Cassel Mathale, and Free State MEC for Community Safety, Roads, and Transport Jabu Mbalula alongside other members of the newly formed Campus Community Safety Forum.

The University of the Free State (UFS) hosted a two-day Ministerial Campus Safety Launch on 12 and 13 March 2025, a collaborative effort spearheaded by the UFS Protection Services in partnership with the South African Police Service (SAPS) to enhance safety and security for students and staff.

The event, held at the Centenary Complex on the UFS’s Bloemfontein Campus, aimed to address safety concerns, introduce a framework for campus security, and formally launch the Campus Community Safety Forum (CCSF).

Notable attendees included UFS Vice-Chancellor and Principal Prof Hester C. Klopper, Deputy Minister of Police Cassel Mathale, Free State MEC for Community Safety, Roads and Transport Jabu Mbalula, Acting SAPS National Deputy Commissioner for Support Services Lieutenant General Lineo Nkhuoa, Senior Director of Protection Services Noko Masalesa, Deputy Director of Protection Services Cobus van Jaarsveld, representatives from various UFS departments, SAPS officials, and members of the Institutional Student Representative Council (ISRC).

Multi-stakeholder approach to campus safety

As the driving force behind the initiative, the UFS Protection Services played a crucial role in ensuring that safety discussions translated into actionable solutions. Prof Klopper emphasised the importance of a collaborative approach to campus safety, saying, “I believe what makes this initiative destined for success is its focus on cooperation and collaboration. Each stakeholder brings a specific body of expertise to the table.”

The Deputy Minister reaffirmed the SAPS’s commitment to enhancing safety in academic environments. He noted that safety in learning environments remains a key priority for the SAPS. “We are fully aware that we need you [management and the student community] to be part of us in an endeavour to better the crime situation in and around this institution,” he said.

MEC Mbalula acknowledged that safety on campuses requires collaboration from various parties. “Safety on campus is not the responsibility of one entity alone; it requires the involvement of students, faculty, security personnel, law enforcement agencies, and the broader community,” he said.

Identifying key security challenges across UFS campuses

The need for strengthened security measures was reinforced by ISRC representative Ogorogile Moleme, who detailed the safety concerns faced by students on the Bloemfontein, South, and Qwaqwa Campuses.

Muggings, break-ins, and cyber-related crimes remain a challenge for the Bloemfontein Campus, especially in off-campus residences. “While the university has made significant strides to have off-campus security, we have seen an increase in reports of muggings – for example, the incident of a student who was mugged by criminals driving by – break-ins, and cyber-related crimes,” Moleme said.

South Campus faces issues related to accessibility and transport safety, particularly for students living in townships. “Most of our students at the South Campus end up residing ko kasi [in a township], and we know the situation… forcing them to constantly have to go to campus to access resources and study facilities, which thus leave them exposed and vulnerable to mugging, kidnappings, robbery and others.”

On the Qwaqwa Campus, the challenges are heightened by limited police visibility and response times, as well as inadequate lighting in some off-campus residences. “The conditions of the safety of off-campus accommodations there is concerning,” Moleme emphasised.

Launch of the Campus Community Safety Forum (CCSF)

On the second day of the event, the Campus Community Safety Forum (CCSF) was officially launched, marking a critical step in the UFS’s proactive approach to security. The CCSF is a structured body that brings together representatives from the university and the SAPS to enhance collaboration and implement preventative security measures.

Its members include:

• From UFS: Protection Services, ISRC, Division of Student Affairs, Student Counselling and Development, the Gender Equity and Anti-Discrimination Office, the Department of Communication and Marketing, and other key university stakeholders.

• From the SAPS: The Community Police Forum, Youth Crime Prevention Desk, officers from the Park Road Police Station, and additional law enforcement representatives.

Pledge for a safer campus

In a significant move to formalise their commitment, the Deputy Minister, Vice-Chancellor and Principal, MEC, and other key stakeholders signed the Campus Safety Learning Environment Framework, which sets out specific commitments to improve campus safety, with goals including rolling out the framework at the UFS, appointing station liaison officers to coordinate safety efforts, and establishing campus safety committees with representatives from students, Protection Services, and local law enforcement.

This pledge is a testament to the shared responsibility of ensuring student safety across the campus, with a focus on collaboration, accountability, and proactive solutions.

A call for immediate action

Prof Klopper called on all stakeholders to move beyond discussions and take immediate action. “The forum is not merely a discussion platform, but a governance structure with key roles, responsibilities, and decision-making processes,” she said. She also highlighted the importance of this initiative in developing preventive measures and fostering community engagement in safety efforts.

Van Jaarsveld underscored the critical role students play in maintaining a safe campus environment. He introduced the “four R’s” that he believes are key to promoting safety: “We must reduce the likelihood of crime by being proactive in policing and security efforts… [we must] respond, which involves taking swift and effective action, including thorough investigations led by trained professionals... It is essential for students to report incidents as soon as they occur, as safety issues cannot be addressed if they are not reported. Lastly… in the unfortunate event that a student becomes a victim of crime, they must not only survive but recover and overcome the traumatic impact of the experience.”

He emphasised that these actions are not only the responsibility of law enforcement but of everyone on campus, and ended his speech by declaring, “Safety starts with me.” This call to action reinforced the idea that creating a safe environment is a collective effort, one in which every student plays a crucial part.

The MEC reiterated the Free State government’s commitment to student safety, stating, “The launch of the SAPS Campus Safety Initiative marks a new chapter in our collective effort to make UFS a model of security and excellence,” and added that universities must be places “where knowledge thrives without the shadow of fear”.

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