REINSTATED, RESIGNED, REPLACED

Suzanne-Marie Botha

@szmrie

February brought tumultuous times for the North-West University (NWU) and its Potchefstroom Student Campus Council (SCC) after a motion of no confidence led to the dismissal, reinstatement, and resignation of the SCC: Secretary for the term 22/23, Beàtha Groenewald. Wapad followed up with Groenewald and Yikumba Andreas, the current Potchefstroom campus SCC chairperson and NWU Student Representative Council (SRC) chairperson. Please read the first article here: https://wapad.online/?p=1642

After her dismissal as SCC: Secretary on 14 February, Groenewald challenged the validity of the process with the help of AfriForum’s legal counsel. This led to her reinstatement on 24 February. Groenewald states that amongst the options AfriForum offered her, fighting for her reinstatement and a public apology was the best route since a defamation case could take as long as three years. Her reinstatement, however, was short-lived, as the SCC then sent Groenewald a notice to invite her to a meeting where a second motion of no confidence was scheduled against her. Groenewald subsequently resigned from her position before the meeting. 

The SCC intended to carry out the second motion of no confidence against Groenewald as they felt she could no longer be trusted with the confidential and privileged information that she had access to. Andreas states that SCC members were under the impression that Groenewald’s loyalty was no longer with the SCC in support of the students, but that it was with a specific residence against the SCC. 

Groenewald’s main concern still lies with the fact that she has not received a public apology from the office of the SCC regarding her initial dismissal, which was a result of “baseless claims.” She remains adamant about the fact that she never shared any confidential information with any HC members that they weren’t already aware of. “[In the end] I am associated with this SCC. Everyone is mad the SCC, and at me. Residences asked me why I wasn’t standing up for them. So, I did. And then I got into trouble for that,” Groenewald added. She also claims that Andreas had one on one conversations with all the SCC members before the meeting to convince them that she would leak more information, and told them that if there were budget meetings, she probably would tell residences how much money the SCC had access to.

She maintains that the incident was only a means to an end to carrying out a personal vendetta held against her. “The whole situation came as a result of a misunderstanding, but it was all they needed to get rid of me,” Groenewald states. After the first-year orientation program on the Potchefstroom campus was disrupted on 11 February, a meeting was scheduled to discuss the situation with SCC members. After the meeting, Groenewald met with a House Committee (HC) member of one of the male residences. Groenewald says that she didn’t mention anything that was said in the SCC meeting to the HC member, and she only shared her personal grievances with him. Yet this interaction was supposedly what led to the misunderstanding between the SCC members and Groenewald. 

According to Andreas, the claims of a personal vendetta against Groenewald are nonsensical since no single vote can remove a person from office. “No one had a personal vendetta against Beàtha. If she is referring to me, I didn’t have a personal vendetta against her. And I am only one vote out of 13 people,” Andreas stated. The result of the first motion of no confidence against Groenewald was supported by most of the SCC, who at this point, claim to have lost confidence in her. Andreas said that Groenewald’s message to the public through various media outlets and social media platforms was that she was “fighting for the students,” but that he believes she rather advocated for false claims. “The context was provided, that that (refer to previous article) is actually not what happened. But with the way she walked into the meeting, she already had a preconceived idea of what exactly happened,” states Andreas. 

As for the “baseless claims,” Andreas told Wapad that the SCC does not need any grounds to carry out a motion of no confidence. “If people want to have a motion of no confidence, even against me, it must pass according to the constitutional rules that are written. You don’t need to have had either a warning or a fine against you to constitute a motion of no confidence,” he added. Yet, he maintains that the decision came after various factors and incidences over the past term were taken into account. 

Groenewald has garnered a lot of media attention over these past few weeks because of her willingness to address the matters that transpired. She stated that she is very grateful to media outlets and AfriForum who contacted her first. Yet, she is saddened by the fact that external people are willing to support her, while the campus she gave five years of her life to, running various projects, now only treats her as a student number. “They never asked for my side of the story. They never called me to ask me if I was okay. They didn’t ask me for any information when they conducted the internal investigations, while I have all the information.” 

While Groenewald is disappointed by the NWU and its (lack of) approach to the situation, Andreas dismisses the “stories” that were released as false news. He claims that several news outlets ran one-sided stories without even contacting him, proving that they wanted to share a specific agenda. Many of these outlets have alluded to “voice notes” that contain the evidence to support the initial claims made of racial exclusion. Groenewald has also confirmed the existence of these “voice notes.” The recorded message comes from a meeting between the SCC and HC members of town residences, where the chairperson, deputy chairperson, and residence officer represented the SCC.

When asked about the recording, Andreas shared that although these alleged voice notes were obtained without the consent of the speaker, he calls on people to share them in a formal way. “We are still waiting for people to come forward with that voice note, because then we have a case, and we can report that.” 

Groenewald also mentioned that there are rumors circulating that Andreas would take legal action against her for “slandering” the NWU’s name. She is awaiting confirmation on the matter with AfriForum’s legal counsel by her side. Andreas did not confirm or deny these rumours but made it clear that he believes action should be taken. “Regarding whether the rumours are true or not, I will not make a statement. But I will say that I have spoken to the Executive Director of Student Life and asked them to follow a disciplinary hearing because you cannot slander the NWU’s name and say that people were excluded because of race while you know that that’s not the reason why,” states Andreas. He believes that Groenewald wanted the news to be catered to a particular audience, which is why she spoke with the media without consulting the other SCC members. 

Andreas claims that an incident such as this should be something he is upset about, as Groenewald had privileged information as an SCC member, and then went on to discuss various incidents with the media. “The only person that has a right to address students and the public on matters on behalf of the SCC is the SCC Chairperson. That’s the right and duty of the SCC Chairperson, and on an institutional level, the SRC Chairperson,” he added. Andreas believes addressing the situation now before the new term and newly elected members join the SCC is the best way forward. “Most of our work is now trying to correct the past gaps that have been left but also to make sure that we don’t leave any gaps in our generation as well. To lessen the burden of future SCC and SRC members,” claims Andreas. 

Some student concerns were raised about the fact that an SCC member is elected into office by a lengthy voting process, where the students’ voices are supposed to be the main driving force. And yet, a simple process within the SCC office dismissed one of these members who campaigned for the students’ support. Andreas addressed the concerns as follows, “We are voted in by students to represent student needs as a collective. No one will vote for one specific person to fulfil a specific mandate. You are voted in to fulfil the mandate collectively. The rules are clear. The SRC and SCC have a right to impose a vote of no confidence on an individual with justifiable reason. We don’t govern ourselves. We have rules that govern us.”

Groenewald’s final statement concluded her feelings towards the portfolio she left behind. “I have a fantastic committee. They are the only reason I didn’t want to resign. Because I care so much for my committee. I know the portfolio is in good hands. I am really excited for them. [But] it is really tough not being a part of it anymore.” Groenewald and AfriForum’s legal counsel have also made plans regarding other statements that were circulated by political parties that were a defamation of her character. These statements were, however, recently retracted, but Groenewald claims that she and her team remain ready to take on any cases of public defamation against her, as well as the possible disciplinary action by the NWU. 

On Wednesday, 7 March, the SCC released a statement wherein they announced that Carissa de Klerk, who took on the role of SCC: Acting Secretary on 14 February officially resigned from the portfolio of secretary. According to Andreas, this is due to health-related matters. De Klerk will continue serving in her current position as SCC: Academics Officer. Faith Mhlongo, current SCC: Transformation and Diversity Officer with Current Affairs will now take on the additional role of SCC: Acting Secretary at the Potchefstroom campus.

The NWU’s spokesperson, Louis Jacobs, told Wapad that the NWU will not be making any further comments about the situation.