CAPE TOWN - UCT Philosophy Professor David Benatar has been dealt a major blow in his attempt to invoke the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA) to know “Who is the Black Academic Caucus (BAC)?” after the Western Cape High Court dismissed his case and made a punitive costs order against him.
He had turned to the high court following several public rows between himself and the BAC, a recognised voluntary association set to challenge the slow pace of transformation at UCT that “continues to maintain hegemonies and reproduce colonial relations of power.”
The BAC had accused Benatar’s actions in the past of being “racially inflective”.
In his founding affidavit, Benatar referred to a statement issued by the BAC on September 14, 2015 regarding events which occurred at a meeting of the humanities faculty board attended by the vice-chancellor, the dean of humanities, and a number of other senior scholars in the faculty.
On the agenda was a proposal that vegetarian or vegan food be included on the menu at board meetings and faculty events.
The chairperson noted that the issue raised wider considerations than just the board and suggested that it merited consultation with other members of the faculty.
The BAC supported this, according to court papers, while Benatar and others felt otherwise and demanded that their proposal be debated there and then.
Having taken up about half the time of the meeting with their vocal objections, Benatar’s “group” is alleged to have walked out in a huff.
The BAC 2015 statement requested Benatar to be called to account.
Benatar references a further statement made by the BAC on October 2, 2017 which is titled “Parading White Privilege”.
In that statement the BAC expressed its dissatisfaction with the alleged unequal treatment in the philosophy department of black and white students.
At the time the BAC said a black African student was refused her duly performed (DP) despite the fact that she had presented evidence of a debilitating medical condition, while compassion for white students who bought tickets to attend the Rocking the Daisies music festival in Darling was granted.
“These statements were a personal attack on my integrity, reputation, and good name. Furthermore, they constitute unfair discrimination which impugned upon my right to be treated equally,” Benatar argued.
Benatar had requested a complete BAC membership list and office-bearers as of September 2015, October 2017 and May 2020; the constitution and founding documents and rules of the BAC; and all public statements made by the BAC since its founding.
But Judge Patrick Gamble said: “In this case, a voluntary association representing a group of concerned academics has been put to unnecessary expense in opposing an application which is without merit. That constitutes vexatious litigation as contemplated in Alluvial Creek and a punitive costs order may be made.”
“Considering Professor Benatar’s request in the light of these authorities, I am driven to conclude that he has failed to establish, with the requisite degree of accuracy, what the right is that he wishes to exercise or protect and how the information requested from the BAC will assist him in exercising or protecting such right. These allegations do not say what course of action at law Professor Benatar intends pursuing.
“Viewing the two statements contextually, it is clear that they were issued by the BAC acting in its collective capacity. Further, its constitution informs Professor Benatar of its objectives, its broader constituency and its status as a legal persona. Accordingly, any legal or other process aimed at exercising the professor’s legal rights thus lies against the BAC as such and falls to be commenced against the BAC.”
Asked to comment on the judgment, Benatar chose to attack this publication, accusing the Cape Times of publishing what he claimed to be unfounded allegations about him.
“I cannot comment on the high court’s judgment at this point, for reasons that should be clear to you. I’m confident that when the full facts emerge the Cape Times won’t publish them,” he said.
BAC secretary Dr Sabelo Hadebe welcomed the judgment, saying: “There will always be quarters which continue to resist transformation and change, and this court case reminds us that there is a lot of work ahead.
“The BAC will continue to fight against systemic injustices and structural and institutional racism that continue to place undue barriers on black students and staff from realising their potential.
“UCT, as with the collective of the South African higher education institutions, have no choice but to transform. The very existence of these institutions remains untenable if they fail to transform their institutional cultures, and the student and staff profiles to better reflect the lived experiences of the diversity of South Africans and especially the historically marginalised black communities,” said Hadebe.
Cape Times