Burning transformation issues at UP brought to the attention of Parliament

Leah Rees

On 14 September, UP and its stakeholders discussed a range of issues in front of the National Assembly’s Portfolio Committee for Higher Education, Science, and Innovation. UP management discussed and answered questions regarding the registration fee increase protests spearheaded by members of the SRC in August, transformation, and sexual harassment amongst many other burning issues.

Sexual harassment

Severe allegations against UP involving sexual harassment and labour violations were lodged by the labour movement at UP (which includes APSA, NEHAWU, UPWO, and Solidarity which collectively represent approximately 30% of UP’s total workforce).

According to the Committee’s summary of the meeting: “sexual harassment allegations were emphatically and repeatedly raised by members as a significant matter of concern”. The Union highlighted a specific alleged incident where a female staff member was sexually harassed and then subsequently offered a director position. This allegation of sexual harassment was made against Vice-chancellor Prof. Tawana Kupe.

Concerning the allegations lodged against Prof. Kupe he said “I cannot comment on that, I’ll leave it to the investigation. I fear absolutely no investigation. I put this on the record because as one member here said an allegation thrown out to you used willy-nilly without a basis in facts or an independent investigation are harmful. In fact for me today it might be that I actually should not continue in my position, how do you hold your authority in this context.”

The Union also expressed concern that cases are not dealt with the dignity they deserve and that there is a difference in the way the UP handles allegations of sexual harassment - which ultimately depend on the race of the accused.

Following these allegations, the Committee not only requested a report from the UP council regarding all cases of sexual harassment that allegedly have occurred at UP and were brought to their attention.

However, before the submittal of this report UP was also requested to hold a stakeholder’s meeting within two weeks following the presentation, which would have fallen around the time of 28 September.

However, it was reported that this meeting did not happen and that subsequently the report will also be delayed. According to the Director of the Department of Institutional Advancement, Rikus Delport, “the university is looking into a date that will suit all parties for both the stakeholder engagement and report back to Parliament” as “UP was unable to confirm a date with all parties”. Delport stated that UP will revert to the Committee by 28 October.

Protesting: a last resort

Prof. Kupe reported on the August protests saying that students were misinformed as UP has no ‘registration fee’ but rather an initial payment to be made at the beginning of the year. Prof. Kupe explained in his presentation that the initial fee which increased is still lower than three other institutions, and does not affect the overall tuition fee.

Prof. Kupe described the protest as an “attempt to mobilise” which he stated was allowed as it is part of South Africa’s Constitution. However, what Prof. Kupe described as “being not okay” is when students resort to the disruption of classes or the blocking of buses or campuses. Prof. Kupe also explained that the suspension of students was a method “to persuade them” to halt this action which led to the matter being resolved.

However, what was interesting is that the 2022 SRC President, Thuto Mashile, and SRC Secretary General, Tarik Lalla as well as the Union, expressed that they resorted to mass action this year, as a last resort to persuade UP to listen. The Union expressed a level of understanding with the SRC as they agreed that things take too long at UP so they resorted to strikes as a tool to get the vice-chancellor’s attention regarding salary concerns.

Several Committee members also seemed to understand the position of the SRC regarding their decision to protest in August, especially if the university makes themselves, in the words of Committee member Duduzile Patricia Sibiya “untouchable”. Sibiya also wondered if the protest was caused by students if management seemed difficult to engage with.

The SRC responded to the protest discussion by emphasising that although students did disrupt lectures, all engagements were nonviolent with the intention of forcing a meeting

According to Lalla this meeting has still not occurred.

However, Lalla alleged that there was the victimisation of student leaders by UP as a narrative was painted that the students involved were hijackers or intimidating students, which is incorrect and harmful.

A shift to English, Sepedi, and Afrikaans

Mashile and Lalla also showed support for a shift to multilingualism, especially as this would create a more representative academic space. This shift would involve UP moving from one main academic language, English, to three; English, Afrikaans, and Sepedi.

However, they expressed concern that a push towards multilingualism will return UP’s main languages of academic engagement back to English and Afrikaans. Lalla expressed that although Sepedi is the third proposed language, it is currently not at the same level as the other two languages and therefore concerns exist that it might become an afterthought.

Other issues

Mashile and Lalla brought up a multitude of other concerns. These include the placement in TuksRes lacking transparency, issues faced by students in private accredited accommodations, residence culture being unconducive to students of colour, and that students feel uncomfortable raising their concerns, especially in residences, safety and said that even on campus “students do not feel safe” and that this feeling exists in student spaces on and off campus. Lalla also expressed concerns regarding the Green Route, saying that security guards might not feel safe if they accompany students to and from their accommodations if they are alone.

Lalla also said that the SRC is concerned over the cost of food on campuses as although food prices have increased, and there is a justification for this increase, there is an inconsistency in prices of food across campuses. Lalla also brought up the lengthy periods and procedure in place before being able to see a psychologist with the UP Counselling Unit.

The Committee also had an opportunity to ask questions following the presentations. However, Prof. Kupe explained during his response to the Committee’s questions that said there should have been better coordination as to what was required of UP and a better administrative process on behalf of the Committee. Prof. Kupe said that of all the questions asked, UP had answers to 75% of them at the time of the presentation, as they had 70 slides. However, they did not have sufficient time to delve into their entire presentation in only an hour.

However, presentations aside, one must wonder how UP will handle the investigations into these allegations and whether they will be swept under the rug or met with an appropriate amount of transparency - but time will tell.