Cape Town - The Stellenbosch University (SU) council has cleared rector and vice-chancellor Professor Wim de Villiers on allegations of nepotism and dishonesty, stating that the decision to use the rector’s discretionary placement (RDP) to admit two relatives into the university programme was a “regrettable error of judgement”.
After meeting on July 1, the university council cleared De Villiers following an investigation and report findings by the Lewis committee. The council appointed the committee to investigate the allegations levelled against De Villiers for admitting two relatives from his wife’s family to SU.
The university said in a statement that the Lewis committee found no serious misconduct by the rector that warranted the removal from office.
“When exercising his RDP, he did not breach a rule or policy of the university and did not act dishonestly in making the discretionary placements such as to lead to a breakdown of trust between SU and the rector, rendering his continued employment intolerable,” the statement read.
Nepotism or conflict of interest policies did not apply to RDPs as RDP guidelines provided a wide discretion in placements.
“The rector’s failure to perceive that any discretionary placement to a relative would, or could, lead to favouritism was a regrettable error of judgement and showed a lack of ethical insight,” the statement read. ”The placement of the two nephews and the rector’s handling of both the placement and of the attention that followed this, has dented the trust of his colleagues.”
The SU council said no new discretionary academic or residential placements would take place until the process of reviewing the RDP guidelines, conflict of interest policy, the nepotism policy and related policies was completed.
Council chairperson Nicky Newton-King said: “As a university community, we welcome the opportunity for scrutiny and reflection. Council has devoted considerable time and effort in investigating the allegations in a thorough and independent process and has discussed the outcome of the investigation robustly.
“Council accepted and appreciated the rector’s unconditional apology for his error of judgement and the impact this has had on the institution and all the people involved.”
Council also voted against a motion calling for De Villiers’ dismissal by members of SU’s executive committee of the convocation. The executive committee of the convocation had exclusively put forth the call, without prior consultation with the broader convocation, constituting over 200 000 members.
On June 1, an extraordinary convocation meeting took place and members voted in favour of a motion of no confidence in the executive committee of the convocation, excluding the vice-president Dr Rudi Buys, with the members subsequently vacating their positions, excluding Buys.
The five-person executive committee of the convocation assists the convocation which must “achieve its objectives and perform its function” and “gives effect to decisions of the convocation”.