Latest News Archive

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

Academic delivers inaugural lecture on South African foreign policy
2007-08-06

 

In her inaugural lecture Prof. Heidi Hudson from the Department of Political Sciences, focused on the impact that Pan-Africanist sentiments have had on South Africa’s foreign policy. She also put the resulting contradictions and ambiguities into context. At her inaugural lecture were, from the left: Proff. Frederick Fourie (Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the UFS), Heidi Hudson, Engela Pretorius (Vice-Dean: Faculty of The Humanities) and Daan Wessels (Research Associate in the Department of Political Science).
Photo: Stephen Collett

Academic delivers inaugural lecture on South African foreign policy

“We are committed to full participation as an equal partner … opposed to any efforts which might seek to project South Africa as some kind of superpower on our continent. … the people of Africa share a common destiny and must therefore … address their challenges … as a united force...” (Mbeki 1998:198-199).

Prof. Heidi Hudson from the Department of Political Science referred to this statement made by president Mbeki (made at the opening of the OAU Conference of Ministers of Information in 1995) when she delivered her inaugural lecture on the topic: South African foreign policy: The politics of Pan-Africanism and pragmatism.

One of the questions she asked is: “Can the South African state deliver democracy and welfare at home while simultaneously creating a stable, rules-based African community?”

She answers: “South Africa needs to reflect more critically and honestly on the dualism inherent in its ideological assumptions regarding relations with Africa. South Africa will always be expected by some to play a leadership role in Africa. At the moment, South Africa’s desire to be liked is hampering its role as leader of the continent.”

In her lecture she highlighted the ideological underpinnings and manifestations of South Africa’s foreign policy. Throughout she alluded to the risks associated with single-mindedly following an ideologically driven foreign policy. She emphasised that domestic or national interests are the victims in this process.

Prof. Hudson offers three broad options for South Africa to consider:

  • The Predator – the selfish bully promoting South African economic interest.
  • Mr Nice Guy – the non-hegemonic partner of the African boys club, multilaterally pursuing a pivotal but not dominant role.
  • The Hegemon - South Africa driving regional integration according to its values and favouring some African countries over others, and with checks and balances by civil society.

She chooses option three of hegemony. “Politically correct research views hegemony as bad and partnership as good. This is a romanticised notion – the two are not mutually exclusive,” she said.

However, she states that there have to be prerequisites to control the exercise of power. “The promotion of a counter-hegemon, such as Nigeria, is necessary. Nigeria has been more effective in some respects than South Africa in establishing its leadership, particularly in West Africa. Also needed is that government should be checked by civil society to avoid it sinking into authoritarianism. The case of business and labour coming to an agreement over the HIV/Aids issue is a positive example which illustrates that government cannot ignore civil society. But much more needs to be done in this regard. South Africa must also be very careful in how it uses its aid and should focus potential aid and development projects more explicitly in terms of promoting political stability,” she said.

Prof. Hudson said: “It is also questionable whether Mbeki’s Afro-centrism has in fact promoted the interests of ordinary citizens across Africa. Instead, elite interests in some countries have benefited. But ultimately, the single most important cost is the damage done to the moral code and ethical principles on which the South African Constitution and democracy is founded.

“In the end we all lose out. More pragmatism and less ideology in our relations within Africa may just be what are needed,” she said.

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