MARCHING FOR JUSTICE AND POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY: THE TRUTH BEHIND THE TMM LOFTS PROTEST

Mhlengi Khumalo

@into.mbiyakwakhumalo

 

This weekend, images of a damaged gate and videos of chanting crowds in Potchefstroom circulated widely on TikTok. Without context, the footage appeared to show student unrest, leading some viewers to label the actions as violent or unethical.

 

However, according to multiple students present at the scene, the events of Saturday, 15 November, and Sunday, 16 November, formed part of a coordinated protest responding to concerns about how a reported case of Gender-Based Violence (GBV) was handled by the residence, university structures, and SAPS Potchefstroom.

 

Background: The Housing Decision

 

Before the protests began, the survivor—who reported an alleged rape on 06 September 2025—received notice that her lease renewal at TMM Lofts had been declined because she was “flagged”.

 

In correspondence with management, the student questioned the decision and referenced House Rule No. 5, which prescribes serious consequences for individuals who commit “physical assault, rape, or contraventions of the Sexual Offences Act.” She argued that the rule was being applied in a way that disadvantaged her as the complainant. She also expressed concern that her roommate was informed before she was, describing this as a breach of privacy.

 

TMM Lofts responded that, as a privately owned residence, “right of admission is reserved,” without addressing her questions about safety, the policy, or the allegations regarding the accused.

 

Circulation of Private Messages

 

Tensions escalated when private messages between the survivor and the accused were shared in a group chat for residents. In a detailed response, the survivor explained that ongoing communication after the incident was due to confusion and emotional paralysis following trauma, not consent or acceptance. She described feeling mocked when she attempted to address the incident directly.

 

This incident became a significant catalyst for the student mobilization that followed.

 

Saturday: Protest at TMM Lofts

 

On Saturday, students marched to TMM Lofts seeking a conversation with management. According to accounts from students present, the group was aware the residence had closed its gates prior to their arrival. When students requested dialogue, they were informed that the gates would not be opened.

 

Students describe the forced opening of the gate as an act of frustration after prolonged attempts to engage were unsuccessful. Those present maintain that no residents were harmed and that the crowd remained focused on requesting acknowledgement of their concerns.

 

A student who witnessed the events criticized social media posts that framed the incident without context, stating that clips showing only the gate being damaged misrepresented the situation.

 

Engagement with NWU Protection Services and the Vice-Chancellor

 

After leaving TMM Lofts, protesters turned to NWU Protection Services and the Vice-Chancellor’s residence in an attempt to escalate the matter institutionally. Students describe being met by police and private security and receiving inconsistent information about whether the Vice-Chancellor was available to speak. Ultimately, no engagement took place.

 

Sunday: March to SAPS Potchefstroom

 

On Sunday, the students marched to SAPS Potchefstroom, citing concerns about how the initial report of rape was handled.

 

According to the survivor’s account and students familiar with the case, the report was not formally investigated at the time and no docket was opened. The survivor states that she was advised the case was “not strong enough” and that an apology session was facilitated instead. She was issued a Protection Order, but students argue that this process did not follow the trauma-informed approach required in GBV cases.

 

The students submitted a Memorandum of Demand, referencing obligations under the Sexual Offences Act 32 of 2007. They requested:

 

• Temporary suspension of the officer involved

• A disciplinary investigation

• Transfer of the case to the Family Violence, Child Protection and Sexual Offences (FCS) Unit

• A written acknowledgement of procedural shortcomings

• Proof of compliance by 20 November 2025

 

The memorandum also calls for systemic changes, including mandatory GBVF training for SAPS personnel.

 

If these items are not addressed by the deadline, students have indicated they will return to SAPS Potchefstroom on Friday, 21 November, for a public report-back to community stakeholders and supporting organisations.

 

The Broader Issue

 

While much of the public attention has focused on the damaged gate, students emphasize that their actions stem from broader concerns about the processes that followed the survivor’s initial report. They argue that the situation reflects the systemic barriers many GBV survivors face when seeking assistance—from reporting to housing safety.

 

The coming days will determine how SAPS Potchefstroom, NWU institutional structures, and TMM Lofts respond to the concerns raised. The students who gathered over the weekend state that their intention is not unrest, but accountability and access to justice.

 

 

Edited by Simoné de Witt