The University of Fort Hare has rejected allegations that its council is factionalised and suppresses dissenting views.
This follows the resignation of two senior council members who accused the institution’s governing body of abandoning good governance principles.
University spokesperson JP Roodt said the institution rejected claims by former acting council chair Khuselwa Marala and former acting deputy chair Judith Favish that council had become “highly factionalised”, insisting robust debate remained part of normal governance processes.
The two resigned recently while facing disciplinary proceedings over alleged breaches of the university’s council code of conduct.
Roodt said both members “were afforded a procedurally fair opportunity to respond to serious allegations concerning possible breaches of the council code of conduct, present their respective cases and submit relevant evidence, but they elected to resign before these processes were concluded”.
“Council has not yet deliberated on the resignations.
“Consequently, it would be premature to comment further, as doing so could prejudice the matters under consideration and the related proceedings.
“Council, however, rejects claims that dissenting views are suppressed or that it is factionalised.
“Robust debate and principled disagreement are legitimate features of collective governance, provided they are expressed through established structures and in accordance with the duties of confidentiality, collective accountability and factual accuracy,” Roodt said.
He said the council would not permit “unsupported allegations or public speculation to distract it from its responsibilities”.
Favish, however, stood by the allegations, saying she and Marala resigned because they no longer believed they could effectively discharge their responsibilities as council members.
“Our decision to resign was an extremely difficult one,” she said.
“In part, our resignation is prompted by the fact that notwithstanding the stated commitment to a fair process for adjudicating the charges, we believe that the outcome of the process is a foregone conclusion.
“In the light of our experience, we have regretfully concluded that we are not able to perform effectively the role which we believe is required of members of council.”
The charges they faced included allegedly authoring and circulating correspondence informing senior university managers and stakeholders of the precautionary suspension of vice-chancellor Prof Sakhela Buhlungu before council had officially communicated the decision.
They were also charged with writing to higher education minister Buti Manamela about alleged appointment irregularities at the university before the correspondence had been considered by the executive committee, despite saying they had originally been mandated by council to write the letter.
A further charge related to a request to registrar Njabulo Zuma to circulate correspondence they had authored to members of senior management containing concerns about council operations and matters discussed during a closed council meeting.
Favish described the charges as “petty, frivolous and politically motivated”.
In their joint resignation letter, dated July 30, they said they no longer felt able to participate in the deliberations and decisions of council.
They alleged their dissenting views during council deliberations over Buhlungu’s suspension, and later over the process to appoint his successor, had been suppressed.
According to the letter, while council unanimously agreed disciplinary action against Buhlungu was necessary, a minority of members opposed placing him on precautionary suspension.
They said Favish’s request to table an alternative resolution before the vote, and a subsequent request for the minutes to reflect that the decision had been taken by majority vote rather than consensus, were both refused.
“The refusal to entertain a counter-proposal, the insistence on a single motion and the refusal to record that the decision was taken by majority vote rather than consensus was extremely upsetting.
“The effect of these decisions was to silence our voices in the record of the meeting and in the chair’s communication to the university community, which conveyed the impression that the decision was reached by consensus,” they wrote.
They also alleged that council chair Dr Siyanda Makaula had exercised powers belonging to council by adding further charges against Buhlungu without council approval, while disciplinary processes were increasingly being used where dialogue and fair institutional processes were required.
“There had also been differences in the council relating to concerns about voting procedures on key decisions, such as the composition of the selection panel for the appointment of a new vice-chancellor.
“All these things have engendered an environment in the council which we believe runs counter to codes of good governance,” Favish said.
While Zuma could not be reached for comment, it is understood he is also facing disciplinary proceedings relating to the matter.
Another senior university official and a student leader are also understood to be facing disciplinary action over their alleged role in publicising Buhlungu’s suspension before council had officially announced it.
The university’s convocation on Wednesday welcomed the resignations while reaffirming its support for the institution’s council.
Daily Dispatch
