Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
18 March 2025 Photo Supplied
Dr Solomon Chibaya
Dr Solomon Chibaya is a lecturer in the Department of Education Management, Policy, and Comparative Education at the University of the Free State (UFS).

Opinion article by Dr Solomon Chibaya, Faculty of Education, University of the Free State.


One of the most humbling intellectual reckonings occurs when reality defies even the most well-reasoned predictions, compelling one to acknowledge misjudgement. Some may call it swallowing the humble pie, but in the realm of law and governance, it serves as a reminder of the unpredictable nature of socio-political dynamics. When the Basic Education Laws Amendment (BELA) Bill was signed into law, I anticipated a legal battleground - a flood of court challenges from those vehemently opposed to its provisions. I was wrong. I also foresaw fractures within the Government of National Unity (GNU), expecting tensions to manifest in visible discord. Wrong again. The fierce contestation promised by opponents of the Bill and the Act has, thus far, amounted to little more than rhetorical smoke without the anticipated fire. The impassioned declarations of legal warfare that once filled public discourse have not translated into the courtroom the battles as I had envisaged. This turn of events is not only fascinating but also challenges broader assumptions about resistance and contestation in contemporary policymaking.

Why have legal challenges not materialised?

To understand the absence of legal challenges against the BELA Act, one must retrace its origins - its conception, development, and the rigorous debates that shaped it. The BELA Bill was first drafted in 2013, following the African National Congress’s (ANC) 2012 elective conference, which mandated amendments to the South African Schools Act (SASA), 84 of 1996. At its core, the Bill was anchored in the transformative principles of the Constitution of South Africa, serving as a legislative instrument to advance equity, inclusivity, and equality in the education system. Given its constitutional foundation, one must ask: who could successfully litigate against a law built on such unassailable pillars of justice and democratic values? The very essence of the Act is woven into the broader framework of South Africa’s post-apartheid transformation, making any legal opposition not just a challenge to policy but a confrontation with the constitutional ideals that underpin the nation’s democracy.

Constitutional imperative for inclusivity

Any legal challenge against the BELA Act, particularly concerning language and admission policies, would ultimately be rendered unconstitutional. The Act is not merely a legislative adjustment; it is a transformative mechanism that promotes linguistic diversity, broadens access to education, and fosters inclusivity in school admissions and employment. These reforms align with the constitutional vision of democratic participation and equitable opportunity, ensuring that mother-tongue instruction evolves alongside a more integrated and representative education system. Who, then, could successfully contest a model that upholds these fundamental democratic values?

At the heart of the Act’s implementation lies a collaborative governance framework, where School Governing Bodies (SGBs) comprising parents, educators, and non-educator staff, work in tandem with the Department of Basic Education at both provincial and national levels to shape policies that best serve their schools. Rather than diminishing the role of SGBs, the Act strengthens their mandate within a broader, constitutionally guided educational ecosystem. Any resistance to this cooperative approach would not only be a defiance of participatory governance but also an attempt to obstruct the very principles upon which South Africa’s democratic and inclusive education system is built.

A masterstroke in legal foresight

A closer examination of the BELA Act reveals a legislative framework meticulously designed to pre-empt legal battles by embedding arbitration and mediation as the primary mechanisms for resolving disputes. In the event of conflicts between SGBs or their representatives, such as FEDSAS, and the Department of Basic Education, the Act prescribes alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, effectively curtailing costly and protracted litigation. Beyond its procedural elegance, the Act reflects a jurisprudential evolution, drawing heavily from precedents set by past court rulings and sealing the loopholes that once rendered the South African Schools Act (SASA) vulnerable to legal contestation. By doing so, the BELA Act assumes the character of case law, informed by judicial scrutiny and legislative refinement.

With such a robust legal foundation, the anticipated flood of litigation against the Act has failed to materialise. Could I have miscalculated again? Highly improbable. In a climate of economic volatility and geopolitical realignment, financial prudence is non-negotiable, and litigation remains an expensive and time-consuming endeavour. Even the most relentless legal advocates must recognise the futility of challenging a law so deeply embedded in the constitutional ethos of the Republic of South Africa (1996). The once-fiery calls for litigation have seemingly dissipated into a quiet acknowledgement of legal inevitability. 

News Archive

A new dawn for student governance
2011-09-02

 

Our SRC presidents: Richard Chemaly (Bloemfontein Campus) and Bongani Ncgaca (Qwaqwa Campus)
Photo: Hannes Pieterse

Photo Gallery
 

The successful and peaceful completion of the University of the Free State’s (UFS) Student Representative (SRC) elections 2011 herals a new dawn for student governance with the announcement of the results today (1 September 2011).

The SRC elections at the Qwaqwa Campus were completed on 25 August 2011, while the elections at our Bloemfontein Campus took place on 29 and 30 August 2011.

“A new dawn heralds a new day when Richard Chemaly, the son of Lebanese immigrants becomes President of an SRC, as elected by students from all racial backgrounds and from across the student body at large. A new day has arrived when candidates could have won voter support across racial lines; a new day is here when all SRC members are now recognised leaders on the basis of academic accountability,” the Dean of Student Affairs, Mr Rudi Buys, says.

A new dawn has arrived; firstly, insofar as student elections for the choice of student leaders at the UFS now proceed according to a non-racial and a non-party political basis.

Not only did the SRC elections at both the Bloemfontein and Qwaqwa Campuses achieve its required quorum, with 31% (4 729 votes) and 50% (2 112 votes) voter turnout, respectively, but the SRC elected by students at the Bloemfontein Campus is 55% black and 45% white, and 60% female and 40% male. The numbers of votes gained by successful candidates also indicate that voters from all racial backgrounds have voted for their candidates of choice.

Secondly, a new dawn has arrived insofar as student governance occupied by only some student groups claiming to speak on behalf of all students has made way for direct voting for candidates by the broad student body and the threefold increase of student governance structures on campus.

Not only did all students at our Bloemfontein and Qwaqwa Campuses (a total of 15 173 and 4 257, respectively) have the opportunity to participate in voting directly, but nine additional Student Councils were established at our Bloemfontein Campus that each holds an ex officio seat on the SRC and allows for student governance in all the major student sectors of the student body, such as for postgraduate students, international students and all categories of student associations.

The various councils now established include the Student Academic Affairs Council, the Student Associations Council, the Postgraduate Student Council, the International Student Council, the Student Media Council, the Residences Student Council, the Commuter Student Council and the Rag Community Service Fundraising and Service Councils. In addition, all faculties also introduced student representative structures at departmental and faculty level in 2011 to ensure student participation in faculty management and governance.

The SRC members at the Bloemfontein Campus are:

Elective portfolios:
President: Mr Richard Chemaly
Vice-President: Mr Lefata David Maklein
Secretary: Ms Matshepo Ramokgadi
Treasurer: Mr Werner Pretorius
Arts & Culture: Ms Alta Grobelaar
Accessibility & Student Support: Mr William Clayton
First-generation Students: Ms Petre du Plessis
Media, Marketing & Liaison: Ms Biejanka Calitz
Sport: Mr Bonolo Thebe
Student Development & Environmental Affairs: Ms Busisiwe Madikizela
Transformation: Ms Qaqamba Mhlauli

Ex officio portfolios:
Dialogue & Ex officio: Associations Student Council: Mr Anesu Ruswa
Academic Affairs & Ex officio: Academic Affairs Student Council: Mr Jean Vermaas
Residence Affairs & Ex officio: Campus Residences Student Council: Ms Mpho Mokaleng
City student Affairs & Ex officio: Commuter Student Council: Ms Annemieke Plekker
Postgraduate Affairs & Ex officio: Postgraduate Student Council: Ms Glancina Mokone
International Affairs & Ex officio: International Student Council: Mr Pitso Ramokoatsi
Student Media Affairs & Ex officio: Student Media Council: Ms Nicole Heyns
RAG Community Service & Ex officio: RAG Fundraising Council: Ms Iselma Parker
RAG Community Service & Ex officio: RAG Community Service Council: Ms Motheo Pooe

In the Qwaqwa elections, SASCO achieved 36,84% of the vote, with SADESMO, PASMA and NASMO each achieving 29,73% and 18,56% and 12,74%, respectively .

Mr Bongani Ncgaca was elected as the President of the SRC at our Qwaqwa Campus, while the names of the SRC members at the campus will be announced on 7 September 2011.

The Central SRC will be established on 8 September 2011 by a joint sitting of the two SRCs.

The successful completion of the SRC elections at the Bloemfontein Campus follows a yearlong review process of student governance by a Broad Student Transformation Forum (BSTF) that consists of 59 delegations from student organisations and residences. The BSTF adopted independent candidacy for elective portfolios and additional student councils to provide ex officio seats on the SRC as the template for student governance, following the consideration of a series of benchmarking reports on student governance nationally and internationally.

The UFS Council adopted the new SRC Constitution, as drafted and submitted by the BSTF, on 3 June 2011. 
 

Media Release
1 September 2011
Issued by: Lacea Loader
Director: Strategic Communication
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: news@ufs.ac.za
 

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