(FXI/IFEX) – The following is a 15 March 2006 FXI media release: FXI condemns violation of free expression at Fort Hare University The Freedom of Expression Institute is appalled at the charges levelled against Fort Hare’s Professor Dieter Welz by his university, which accuses him of criticising the University administration in lectures, internal emails and […]
(FXI/IFEX) – The following is a 15 March 2006 FXI media release:
FXI condemns violation of free expression at Fort Hare University
The Freedom of Expression Institute is appalled at the charges levelled against Fort Hare’s Professor Dieter Welz by his university, which accuses him of criticising the University administration in lectures, internal emails and to the media.
The FXI has been following the disciplinary hearing of the professor of Constitutional Law since it began on 28 February 2007. The hearing continues tomorrow. FXI’s attorney, Simon Delaney, also appeared at the hearing as an expert witness on freedom of expression.
The University alleges that Prof Welz’s criticisms constitute a contravention of the ‘Conditions of Service of Staff Employed by the University of Fort Hare’, which were passed under the University of Fort Hare Act of 1969, apartheid legislation which has been repealed. Charges brought under repealed regulations are invalid. The ‘Conditions of Service’ are manifestly unconstitutional, with archaic definitions of misconduct.
Prof Welz may well be protected as a ‘whistleblower’ under the Protected Disclosures Act and may also be protected by South Africa’s Constitution, which specifically protects academic freedom.
Only in the most authoritarian societies do universities prevent academics from speaking to the media about their work, research and opinions and criticisms on the development of society and of their own institutions. South Africa, fortunately, is not such a society.
Any disciplinary action against Prof Welz would constitute an unreasonable limitation on his right to academic freedom and would be unconstitutional. Whatever the outcome of Prof Welz’s hearing, irreparable harm has been done to the climate of free expression at Fort Hare and its reputation as a centre of academic excellence. A climate of fear has taken root and academics, workers and students are afraid of challenging or criticising the university administration. Such a climate is disastrous at an academic institution with a history of independence and academic activism. This disciplinary hearing seriously threatens the spirit of intellectual enquiry and academic freedom at Fort Hare. It could also have a chilling effect on freedom of expression more generally at the institution – something any university should vigorously guard against.
Prof Welz made serious allegations about power and management at the heart of Fort Hare that demands public exposure and debate. However, rather than engaging with the allegations, Fort Hare attempts to stifle and censor this debate, especially amongst its own academics. In practising censorship, Fort Hare has brought itself into disrepute, portraying itself as petty, intolerant, and unreasonable. Disciplining Prof Welz would put Fort Hare in a worse light than if it were to have dealt with his allegations; if anyone has brought the university into disrepute, it is Fort Hare itself.
Unchallenged, a decision to discipline Prof Welz will set a negative precedent for freedom of expression in South Africa’s academic institutions, creating a climate of self-censorship at the very heart of policy-making and intellectual life in this country. It will force academics to refrain from any commentary on or criticism of their universities for fear of being dismissed. This is not what a democracy is about. As workers and citizens of this country, academics have an inalienable right to engage in political speech about matters of public interest, and should be able to do so freely.
