Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

UFS to proceed with relocation of the MT Steyn statue to the War Museum in Bloemfontein

03 June 2020 | Story Lacea Loader

On 1 June 2020, the University of the Free State (UFS) received confirmation from the Member of the Executive Council (MEC) for Sport, Arts, Culture and Recreation, Ms Limakatso Mahasa, that the relocation of the statue to the War Museum in Bloemfontein has been endorsed. The university was also informed that a permit will now be issued by the Free State Provincial Heritage Resources Authority (FSPHRA) for the dismantling, temporary storage, and relocation of the statue to the War Museum.

The notice from MEC Mahasa comes after the Appeal Committee of the FSPHRA decided on 20 August 2019 to uphold appeals from interested parties and to keep the statue at the UFS. Subsequently, the Special Task Team appointed by Prof Francis Petersen, Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the UFS, to develop and implement a framework to engage with a review process on the position of the statue in front of the Main Building on the Bloemfontein Campus, submitted an urgent request to MEC Mahasa to appoint a tribunal and refer the university’s appeal in terms of and in accordance with the provisions of Section 49(2) of the National Heritage Resources Act (NHRA), No 25 of 1999.

“The university’s executive appreciates the endorsement by MEC Mahasa and is satisfied with the findings of the Tribunal Committee, which supports the relocation of the statue. The University Council approved the relocation of the statue on 23 November 2018, after which an extensive process was followed to obtain a permit from the FSPHRA to relocate the statue. The Special Task Team went to great lengths to demonstrate the thoroughness of the public participation process and other supportive steps taken by the university,” says Prof Petersen.

“As there is no precedent for such a public participation process under the current South African law, the Special Task Team was at all times guided by the principles of fairness, inclusivity, and objectivity. It was not an easy process, but the outcome is a significant milestone,” says Prof Petersen.

The findings of the Tribunal Committee include, inter alia, that the university has followed the correct application procedure for the permit, that a proper public participation process was followed that was more comprehensive than required by law, and that no procedural unfairness took place during the public participation process. The Tribunal Committee furthermore found that the decision by the FSPHRA on 30 April 2019 to issue the permit was correct, and that the Appeals Committee appointed by the FSPHRA erred in its decision to uphold the appeal. As a pre-condition, the Tribunal Committee also determined that a conservation plan must be prepared by the university in order to address the process of relocating the statue.

According to Prof Petersen, the university welcomes the findings of the Tribunal Committee as it is in line with the Heritage Impact Assessment Report (HIA) and conservation plan initially submitted to the FSPHRA as part of the application for a permit.

“While we await the issuing of the permit by the FSPHRA, we will now proceed with the necessary arrangements for the relocation of the statue, such as appointing a team for the dismantling, temporary storage, and re-assembly of the statue at the War Museum and appointing a heritage architect to oversee the process. The wishes of President Steyn’s family will be accommodated during the relocation process, as per the findings of the Tribunal Committee,” he says.

Released by:
Lacea Loader (Director: Communication and Marketing)
Telephone: +27 51 401 2584 | +27 83 645 2454
Email: news@ufs.ac.za | loaderl@ufs.ac.za

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”.

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

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