The Wilgenhof Alumni Association will proceed with legal action to have the amended De Jager Panel report on the controversial Wilgenhof residence set aside, accusing the Stellenbosch University (SU) Council of condoning unethical leadership.
This is after the council reaffirmed its decision that the residence will close and reopen as a reimagined male residence.
The continuation of this process was confirmed on Monday during a Council meeting where the Kriegler Panel report was considered.
A three-member panel that includes advocate Karrisha Pillay SC, professor Themba Mosia and chaired by former Constitutional Court judge Johann Kriegler, was appointed last month to investigate specific allegations regarding the amendment and related disclosure of the De Jager Panel report on the Wilgenhof residence.
Allegations of improper interference were made by Chancellor Judge Edwin Cameron against the Vice-Chancellor professor Wim de Villiers and chairperson of Council Dr Nicky Newton-King.
“I discovered that the final paragraph of the final report sent to me on June 1, 2024, had disappeared. Instead, the proposal contained in that paragraph had been moved to a position earlier in the report, but had been altered. It now indicated, not an alternative that ‘appealed’ to the panel, namely a ‘truly deep, carefully managed and facilitated dialogue’, but an alternative that the panel unequivocally rejected,” said Cameron.
According to the findings of the Kriegler panel report, the nondisclosure of the amendment was material and the VC and council chair were duty-bound to reveal the amendment.
“After a robust discussion, council adopted a motion through majority vote which acknowledged that the Vice-Chancellor and Chair of council had erred in not informing Council about amendments to the De Jager Panel report. The minority dissenting votes against the motion were recorded as requested.
“Council accepted that neither had acted ‘maliciously, or in bad faith, or with any intention of influencing the decisions made by council related to Wilgenhof residence, and only did what they believed to be in the best interests of Stellenbosch University’.The motion was critical of the Vice-Chancellor sharing the De Jager Panel report with Chancellor Edwin Cameron. In Council's view, this represented a ‘governance lapse’ which should not be repeated,” said Council.
It also noted Newton-King's apology for an error of judgment related to the non-disclosure of the amendments saying it was a critical lapse of judgment and urged her to avoid a recurrence.
“Council agreed to reconsider its governance processes related to communications between the rectorate, the Chair of council and with council. Finally, council reaffirmed its decisions regarding the residence's closure and reopening as a reimagined male residence. That decision was ‘aligned with a more inclusive, participatory (consultative) approach that the council conducted’. The decisions taken reflect the Council's commitment to rigorous governance, procedural fairness, accountability and respect,” Council added.
The Wilgenhof Alumni Association said it was disappointed because Council was faced with proof of the deceptive behaviour but its response to this was inaction, “thereby condoning unethical leadership.”
The Association’s spokesperson Jaco Rabie said: “The Wilgenhof Alumni Association is continuing with its legal action against the materially flawed and defamatory report, asking the court to set aside the report as well as all decisions based on it. The findings of Kriegler, Pillay and Mosia have bolstered our legal action to have the report set aside, and we are confident that there will be a moment of reckoning when this entire matter is rationally considered in a court of law.
“The Council meeting was the second time SU decided to abandon its own processes out of political expediency. First, when the Wilgenhof report didn't give the answers they wanted, the Rector and Council Chair simply decided it should be amended. And now, when the Council is faced with the highly inconvenient findings of a panel they themselves appointed, they just wave it away as if it's a minor nuisance. But Council's inaction will have severe and lasting consequences," said Rabie.
Cape Times