Die Matie 10-5-17

Page 1

DieMATIE WOENSDAG 10 MEI 2017 | GR ATIS

SES-EN-SEWENTIGSTE JAARGANG | NO 7

Afrikaanse flieks is nie 6 dood nie

Access denied at Jonkershoek after 3 protests

USSA welcomes new president 10

Student court orders mass meeting and vote for parliament speaker

SRC given 10 days to respond ANÉ VAN ZYL

T

Undefeated12

Photo: SASPA

CELEBRATIONS Maties women’s hockey after their victory over UJ. Maties concluded the thrilling series undefeated. Read more on page 12.

Nazi-era posters spark concerns on campus

ARLEEN STONE

Several posters sporting popular Nazi images with a national-socialistic message surfaced on the Stellenbosch University (SU) campus, attracting nationwide attention. The posters, that appeared on campus two nights ago, provide a time and location for a supposed meeting of The Anglo-Afrikaner Student, an unknown group calling for students to “Fight for Stellenbosch”. According to the posters, the meeting will be held in the JS Gericke Library auditorium at 17:00 on 11 May. When approached by Die Matie, library staff stated that the auditorium had not been booked for that date and time. SU spokesperson, Martin Viljoen, said the matter was only brought to the university’s attention late yesterday morning. “The posters were put up on campus without the knowledge or consent of the university, the library or the Student Representative Council (SRC),” stated Viljoen. Viljoen added that a query was received on the availability of the venue and that no official booking

Posters advertising a meeting of ‘The Anglo-Afrikaner Student’ group. was made at the time the posters were displayed. “SU, its library and information service, and its SRC condemn racism, racial superiority and any attempts to polarise our campus community in the strongest possible terms and will not allow any event promoting racial superiority to take place on campus.” Information about the event was

not provided and the origin of the posters remain unknown. “Not only is the message of the posters totally unacceptable, it is also not in line with our institution’s values. There seems to be deliberate mischief-making involved, and if that should be the case, disciplinary steps will be taken,” said Prof Wim de Villiers, rector and vice-chancellor of SU. The Stellenbosch SRC stated they would not tolerate “these types of discriminatory acts” and have called upon the student body to condemn acts of racism and violence. “It is deplorable in a time when the university has called for the decolonisation and transformation of our campus,” said the SRC, promising to hold those involved accountable to their disciplinary code and the South African Bill of Rights. The posters have also been reported to the university’s equality unit and an investigation is currently underway. Any student or staff member with more information is requested to contact the client service centre at 021 808 9111 or to send an e-mail to info@sun.ac.za.

he student court of Stellenbosch University (SU) has ordered the Student Representative Council (SRC) to hold two mass meetings within the coming month. This decision comes after a case was made by ex SRC candidate Inge Odendaal to review the constitutionality of two decisions made by student parliament last year. The two matters under question are the appointment of an interim Speaker, and failure to hold ordinary meetings. The student court has ordered the SRC to call a mass meeting within 10 university days of the ruling. The ruling is in conflict with a principle rule of the SRC that no events or gatherings shall be hosted by the SRC in the two-week period before exams are set to begin. When contacted for comment, chairperson Nomzamo Ntombela failed to respond before print. It remains unclear what the SRC is planning to do about the ruling. It is, however, clearly stipulated in both the 2011 and 2014 versions of the constitution, that students have to be informed of any mass meeting at least one week in advance. If the court ruling is to be followed, the SRC has until 17 May to call the first mass meeting. The purpose of the first mass meeting is for all attending students to elect an independent convener to oversee proceedings at the second mass meeting. Any student may ask the court to set aside the nomination of a convener, if it can be proven that the elected convenor would not fulfil their duties. The SRC must then call a second mass meeting within five university days of the first mass meeting, where all the attending students will elect an independent, impartial, and competent Speaker of parliament. This meeting will be overseen by the elected convener. The elected Speaker of parliament will be under an immediate obligation to call a meeting of parliament and must report to student court regarding the arrangements within five university days after he/she was elected. If successful, the process will reestablish student parliament after the

entity dissolved last year. Parliament has not attempted to meet since.

Student court can’t rule on SRC election convener In a ruling made last Wednesday, SU’s student court found the SRC in contempt of the Student Constitution. “Noncompliance by the SRC with its own prescribed processes is not in line with the values and rights enshrined in Chapter 2 and section 21 of the Student Constitution.” Student court was however unable to rule on the matter of extending the period of appointing an election convener. According to court documents, the court has no discretion in choosing which rules to enforce and which rules to ignore. The documents further state that the court is not empowered to extend any deadline by submitting another date. The court declared that the omission of not appointing an election convener by 31 March is “invalid and inconsistent with the student constitution”.

Which constitution? Student court made use of the 2014 constitution, claiming in its documents that there are no discrepancies between the 2011 and 2014 constitutions in the sections relevant to this matter. However, as pointed out in the previous edition of Die Matie, there are notable differences between the 2011 and 2014 constitutions in the sections relevant to this matter. The 2014 version is also not accepted by the university council. The 2011 version only gives the executive of the SRC the power to appoint the convener. Therefore, the fundamental difference between the relevant sections of the 2011 and 2014 constitution is the parties involved with the appointment of the election convener. If the 2014 constitution is “active” as confirmed by policy officer Jeandré Boshoff, the party responsible for appointing the election convener is the student dean along with the executive committee of the SRC. This implies that student dean, Tonia Overmeyer is also responsible for the appointment of the election convener.


Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.
Die Matie 10-5-17 by Die Matie - Issuu