UCT political science lecturer Dr Lwazi Lushaba has described the independent panel report that probed governance issues at UCT as a “sham” that painted black academics at the university as inept and problematic.
The panel, headed by retired Supreme Court of Appeal president, Judge Lex Mpati, investigated governance issues from 2018 to 2022, the period when the university was under the leadership of former vice-chancellor professor Mamokgethi Phakeng.
The report recommended that the university council institute disciplinary proceedings against Lushaba for violating its code of conduct by using racially offensive language in one or more council meetings.
“Dr Lushaba breached council’s code of conduct by using threats, intimidation, ethnic slurs, personal insults and generally conducting himself in a racially intolerable and disruptive manner during council meetings.
Phakeng’s supporters, in particular Dr Lushaba ...attempted to discredit the idea of an independent inquiry. Lushaba falsely called the decision a ‘racist attack’ against Phakeng and (former council chairperson Babalwa) Ngonyama. There was no evidence to support these allegations,” the report read.
It further claimed that Lushaba accused the council of repeating the “injustices of the past that often saw black women being victimised by intertwining systems of racism and patriarchy”.
In an interview with the “Cape Times” this week, Lushaba said the panel wrote to him outlining three accusations made against him. This included an incident involving ballot boxes during the election of the current dean of humanities and the alleged use of racial language during council.
“According to the letter inviting me (to respond to the allegations), I brought the university to disrepute ... then the allegations were listed. The language suggests that they concluded that I have done so (and) it would not matter what I say in relation to the allegation as they were a ‘by the way’. There was no benefit of doubt but passed judgement so I didn’t present myself to the panel.
I studied language,” he said. Lushaba questioned why he would have to answer to the ballot box incident again as he underwent a disciplinary hearing and a verdict was passed in 2019.
“This was also widely reported in the press so the esteemed panel should have raised that the matter was concluded already. Even with that comment I made at council, barely two minutes after uttering those remarks I withdrew them, and this is in the recording of the council meeting. Unless they did not bother to request for the recording but just reached a predetermined conclusion.
This is astounding to me. Insults were exchanged but I don’t see other people called to account.
“Also, if I ‘generally conducted himself in a racially intolerable and disruptive manner during council meetings – one allegation of racial use of language was put to me but now they are using plural ‘meetings’. They wanted me to go respond to three charges and then bring up other things. You don’t go to a court of law with a charge sheet that is a fishing expedition,” he said.
Lushaba said he is waiting to hear what action the council could take as he has left as a council member.
He added that the report contained a number of factual inaccuracies and that its language was very emotive.
According to Lushaba, there was a trend in UCT, which was also evident in the report, that black South Africans go there to serve but often leave with their characters vandalised.
He said it couldn’t be a coincidence that all people who were found to be involved in wrongdoing were black.
“If you read the language of the report, it suggests that not only are we guilty but we are (guilty of) ineptitude or incapability. The panel says there is no evidence of patriarchy at the university, I’m wondering how they came to that conclusion. If they had requested I submit evidence of this I would have, but they didn’t,” he said, adding prior to the panel being established four black females resigned from council citing toxic masculinity.
“They found what was happening in the council intolerable. This was not a panel but a sham.”
He said it was going to be interesting to see how the university monitors redress and implements transformation as an upcoming senate meeting is expected to debate whether staff should not be asked to declare their race.
“The Department of Labour requires us to report on racial representation of staff. This is already happening with students. We cannot check how many black students are at UCT. Also when the VC, council chairperson and her deputy left these positions they were all replaced by men, in a council that ought to see gender transformation,” Lushaba added.
UCT Council chairperson Norman Arendse said council stands by the findings in the report and will implement the recommendations.
He said they were expecting to meet this weekend and receive a report from an appointed committee on the best-suited action against those implicated.
“The report finds that race was used to sow division. We do not believe that failures in governance and leadership should be construed as a failure in transformation. The report details an abuse of power, bullying and the past failure of Council to act appropriately.
In relation to the individuals implicated in the report, we are deliberating an appropriate course of action. This will be done in line with our policies, procedures, and Code of Conduct.
“Transformation is one of the pillars of the university’s 2030 vision and strategy. We take transformation seriously. We give effect to it in different ways, including through the implementation of our employment equity policy, as well as the measures we take in promoting the development of outstanding early and mid-career black academics. We follow our employment equity policy rigorously in our selection processes.
The UCT Senate has taken steps to address issues and gaps in relation to its gender and race profile. However, we acknowledge that this is a journey,” Arendse said.
Cape Times