DISRUPTED CEREMONY, DISRUPTED COUNCIL

Disrupted ceremony, disrupted council

Suzanne-Marie Botha 

@szmrie

The North-West University (NWU) dominated the headlines of your favourite news outlets yet again over the past week, following the incident that took place during the first years’ welcoming ceremony at the Potchefstroom campus on Saturday, 11 February. This year’s ceremony promised to be a prestigious event, since it was the Potchefstroom campus’s turn to host the Vice Chancellor of the NWU, Dr Bismark Tyobeka. Yet, the prestige was short-lived, as several students decided to leave the amphitheatre venue mid-ceremony. 

On Friday evening, just before midnight, residence House Committee (HC) members received communication from the Student Campus Council (SCC) stating that, due to a lack of space, not all first years can be accommodated in the amphitheatre. Thus, some will need to watch the program through a livestream. HC members were caught off guard and demanded a response from the SCC. It did not take long for claims to be made through various media sources as to the “real reason” behind the exclusion.

After several years of media silence between Wapad and the NWU SCC, Wapad was able to sit down with the SCC: Chairperson, Yikumba Andreas, regarding the incident. He shared that due to a lack of capacity in the amphitheatre, and logistical issues regarding the availability and setup of stands, it was a challenge to find ways to accommodate all the students during the ceremony. This is why the livestream was set up as an option. A lot of the initial discontent among HC members was because of the late notice to residences. Andreas stated that there was a discussion regarding the issues with capacity the Wednesday before the ceremony, and that the communication should have reached residences on the same day. This matter was addressed internally by the SCC. “I posed my questions on why the communication did not reach them on time, and the affected parties did get fined through the disciplinary fines that we have as the SCC itself.” 

According to Andreas, meetings were arranged with the representatives of the town residences specifically, who each boast a large number of first years, compared to on-campus residences. In the meeting, the SCC asked whether the town residences would send a few of their first years to the amphitheatre session as representatives, while the rest of the students join the livestream. As only one of the town residences agreed to the suggestion, it was decided that they will be allowed to take all their students to amphitheatre session, while the other residences would attend the livestreamed session. “We left the meeting saying that we would communicate with the HC if there was space available in the amphitheatre,” Andreas added.

This was also the first opening ceremony where more private students were allowed and encouraged to attend, either at the amphitheatre, or through the livestream. Andreas sees this as a positive step, “I indicated to everyone that I would like student life to be a shared experience.” This was made possible. Allowing private students to share in this event, however, meant that capacity was indeed a prominent issue. Many of the residences were not pleased with the arrangements, which led to the disruptions during the ceremony, and eventually to various statements on media platforms, including accusations of racial discrimination. 

On Tuesday morning, the SCC issued a statement regarding a motion of no confidence that was carried out against Beàtha Groenewald, an SCC member serving her second term, this year as the SCC: Secretary. This was due to a concern with Groenewald’s involvement in “the unauthorized sharing of confidential information with external parties.” More articles were soon published, highlighting the dismissal of Groenewald, as well as allegations that the NWU purposefully excluded specific town residences in the name of diversity. Groenewald told Wapad that although capacity was indeed an issue, there was another underlying issue, “Town residence students were excluded because of their race. Because it will look “too white”, and won’t reflect the image of diversity the NWU is trying to project.” 

Since the SCC members are voted into office by the students, Groenewald sees them as her top priority, “They voted for me to fight for their student identity.” She states that everything came to this point because she was willing to be a voice for students. “The NWU puts so much focus on equality, fairness, transparency, honesty, and racial equality, but in reality, they harbor hidden agendas,”  she added. 

An official statement by Mr Louis Jacobs representing the NWU, was also circulated on Tuesday. Herein he stated that the main concern lies with the capacity of the amphitheatre, and that allegations of racial exclusion need to be supported by evidence. Which, according to Groenewald, does indeed exist.

The motion of no confidence made against Groenewald is a result of claims that she shared confidential information with external parties. Although Groenewald argues that she never shared any information with the media, Andreas states that the accusation was made because of information shared with an HC member of a residence. According to Andreas, he received a call from another SCC member who had been confronted by this HC member about issues that were discussed during a private, formal SCC meeting. “He told me that the HC member spoke to him, explaining to him the exact details of matters we discussed during our meeting,” Andreas explained. He believes there was an evident breach of trust amongst SCC members, which called for the motion of no confidence.

Andreas states that the eventual media exposure was concerning, as it only reflected one narrative, “The fact that we had a meeting in the morning, and that we made decisions was not mentioned. We thought we had a way forward. They decided that they were not going to attend, and that they were rather going to watch. We did not know that people were not happy, they didn’t communicate that.” He claims that he does not mind students speaking to the media, but that they should always stick to the truth.

Groenewald’s main concern is with the grounds and process of her dismissal. While Andreas maintains that a motion of no confidence is considered valid when 12 out of 15 of the SCC members agree with the motion, Groenewald claims that there is more to the process than that, “You need to have at least three complaints made against you. Three formal fines or warnings related to that issue specifically. Then there needs to be a hearing. A third party should get involved. Only then can they address your dismissal.” In this case, both parties confirmed that the motion of no confidence was passed after a single voting session where 13 out of the 15 SCC members agreed with the motion. 

Many have expressed their support for Groenewald, who is willing to share her side of the story, whereas there has been limited communication from the NWU’s side, and it seems likely that the case will be taken further. As Groenewald feels her dismissal is ungrounded, she demands a formal apology from those involved. However, she has expressed that she does not believe she wants to be reinstated as an SCC member, although she remains concerned about the portfolio she had to leave behind, and the arrangements that were made for various events and sponsorships. The portfolio of SCC: Secretary now falls onto Carissa de Klerk, the current SCC: Academic Officer. Andreas confirmed that de Klerk will take on this additional responsibility, and a new SCC: Secretary will not be appointed, “We can’t have bi-elections after five months within the particular term has lapsed,” he told Wapad.

As tensions are high and more light is shed on current and future allegations and cases, Wapad will keep you updated on the developments at the discretion of those directly involved.