(FXI/IFEX) – The following is an abridged 20 March 2007 FXI media release: UKZN academic exercises freedom of expression, gets suspended As yet another South African academic, the University of Kwa-Zulu-Natal’s (UKZN) Professor Evan Mantzaris, faces disciplinary action for exercising his right to free expression, the Freedom of Expression Institute (FXI) again expresses its concern […]
(FXI/IFEX) – The following is an abridged 20 March 2007 FXI media release:
UKZN academic exercises freedom of expression, gets suspended
As yet another South African academic, the University of Kwa-Zulu-Natal’s (UKZN) Professor Evan Mantzaris, faces disciplinary action for exercising his right to free expression, the Freedom of Expression Institute (FXI) again expresses its concern at the erosion of free expression rights at tertiary academic institutions. In terms of the South African constitution, academic freedom is an instance of freedom of expression, and is protected in terms of this right.
Mantzaris is Professor of Sociology and Chairperson of the staff union, the Combined Staff Association (COMSA). Earlier this month, he was suspended from his position in the School of Sociology, and awaits a disciplinary hearing. There are four charges levelled against him; charges 2 and 3 in the letter that was sent to Mantzaris by Deputy Vice-Chancellor Zacharias are of particular concern as they relate to his freedom of expression.
A trademark UKZN attack against critics of management, Charge 2 alleges that Mantzaris “engaged in a concerted campaign to bring adverse publicity to the University and / or some members of staff, with respect to the ‘unbanning’ of Dr Ashwin Desai”. The letter also claims Mantzaris conducted this alleged campaign “with other members of the University from the University premises and using University equipment”. While the letter does not specify what the elements of the campaign were and how exactly Mantzaris is supposed to have caused “adverse publicity”, we have learnt that this refers to Mantzaris’ vocal support of Desai – mainly through media statements – and arguments against the stance taken by the university that Desai was banned from working at UKZN. If academics are not allowed to support each other in terms of their right to conduct academic work and if their support – as in this case – is subject to disciplinary action, then this violates academic freedom and, by inference, freedom of expression.
The third charge against Mantzaris accuses him of having “produced and published defamatory letters about the Vice-Chancellor (VC) and other members of staff”. The “defamatory letters” refer to letters criticising Makgoba that were published in local newspapers. Makgoba accuses Mantzaris of being the secret author of the letters, even though they do not bear the latter’s name. Professor Zacharias also cites correspondence sent by Mantzaris to the Vice-Chancellor, Malegapuru Makgoba, in which he accuses the VC of “conspiring to get rid of [him]”. This, Zacharias concludes, is proof that Mantzaris “engaged, and continue[s] to engage in, a campaign to discredit the Vice-Chancellor in your capacity as an employee and Chairperson of COMSA.”
If the University believes that it has received adverse publicity – and there has been much of it in the past 18 months – then the institution has only itself to blame. It has responded inappropriately to a range of controversies, often lashing out at its critics, leading to even more adverse publicity. The lashing out has, in the case of Mantzaris, taken the form of a suspension; as in the case of Fazel Khan, a disciplinary hearing and, as in the case of Rhodes University Professor Jimi Adesina, a defamation lawsuit. But such actions by UKZN management are not isolated attacks against individuals; they are part of a larger process in which the space for free expression and academic freedom at that university is being narrowed. Taken together with other moves designed to restrict free expression, the picture that emerges is one of a university that is undermining rather than promoting academic freedom and which is in dire need of re-evaluation.
In a letter to Professor Makgoba on the 4th October last year, we pointed out concerns that lead us to this conclusion. Our letter mentioned a report which found that staff felt there was, at the University, ‘a lack of consultation and a lack of meaningful communication; an authoritarian attitude; the privilege of position; intimidation and bullying; a lack of transparency and democratic procedures’. We mentioned Makgoba’s refusal to meet with student leaders to discuss exam exclusions simply because they had spoken to the media. We also mentioned the attempted gagging of staff just before the commencement of a strike and the suing of Rhodes academic Professor Jimi Adesina because he pointed out that such gagging was taking place. We also raised concerns about the university’s “Electronic Communications Policy” which is a gross violation of academic freedom and freedom of expression more generally. Apart from allowing the University to spy on individuals’ email correspondences, it also allows the University to read documents on staff members’ personal computers (that belong to the University).
The FXI does not believe that UKZN management should be pursuing defamation charges against their critics, as this will chill critical debate. Public figures generally have less protection from critical commentary than ordinary individuals, and senior managers like Professor Makgoba need to accept that this is a consequence of the positions they hold.
The UKZN is a controversial institution; if it is to move beyond these controversies, it needs to create maximum space for debate about its future direction, even if this means that management must stomach tough criticism.
Two of the four charges against Mantzaris add to the picture of an institution undermining free expression and the FXI calls on the UKZN management to exclude these charges against the Sociology Professor. No university can afford to be seen as stymieing academic freedom and freedom of expression, which is the impression that many observers are left with about UKZN. In the Mantzaris case, at least, the university should not allow these issues to be part of the accusations against him.
