Recent student protests: UKZN, DUT, USAf & SAUS input

Meeting report

The Chairperson acknowledged the progress in the sector on the student protests that usually take place at the beginning of the academic year. The sector has improved in this but there was still a long way to go. She welcomed the delegations and noted the absence of the DUT Council. The Committee appreciates when Council plays an active role in engaging with the Committee on its role as an oversight body over the institution.

University of KwaZulu-Natal (UKZN) Vice-Chancellor briefing
Prof Nana Poku, Vice-Chancellor at UKZN, spoke to the background and efforts to resolve the unrest, engagements with the SRC, the student demands and the university response to those. The second part covered the impact of the unrest and the current status of teaching and learning at the institution, registration and enrolments, infrastructure damage and the return to campus.

UKZN Student Representative Council briefing
Mr Siphelele Madondo, UKZN SRC Secretary-General, presented the SRC position on the unrest but also touched on a myriad of issues that contributed to the unrest. He spoke on the nature and cause of the unrest; engagements with executive management; critical challenges affecting UKZN students including postgraduate funding, historical debt; NSFAS matters; issuing of certificates; student accommodation; remote online learning; mandatory vaccinations; and SRC bursary fundraising initiative.

Durban University of Technology Vice Chancellor briefing
Mr Thandwa Mthembu, DUT Vice Chancellor, thanked the Committee for the opportunity to present and indicated that the challenges DUT was experiencing were bigger than the institution. There is also collusion amongst different stakeholders in the broader society and even with staff members. These incidents of collusion lead to difficulty in the institution.

Mr Maditsane Nkonoane, DUT Registrar, spoke about what led to the unrest, the nature of the unrest, the efforts to resolve unrest, the impact of the unrest on infrastructure and the current state of the institution. What led to the unrest included vested political and socio-economic interests; anecdotal accounts of collusion between EFF Student Command and security officers for in-sourcing; NSFAS funding confirmation delays; and general resistance to online registration. The nature of the unrest was nothing short of the violent destruction of the University and private property, staff intimidation and widespread vilification of university officers through social media and arson.

To resolve the unrest, DUT set up structures such as the Registration Monitoring Task Team with SRC representation in addition to the Multi-Role Player Forum set up by Student Services as well as monthly consultations to assure co-operative governance. The University also deployed a Strike Force to augment campus security and suspension on-site operations. Although the recent KPMG audit findings cautioned against excessive use of a Strike Force, poor SAPS and POP support led to this eventuality.

The impact of the unrest led to the suspension of on-site operations. Special exams for almost 128 students left with one module to graduate have had to be postponed. Arson has resulted in major losses to both the university and staff members whose cars were burnt. Although the losses have not yet been quantified, cases have been registered with SAPS. The deployment of the Strike Force due to poor SAPS and POP support – despite being members of our Joint Operations Centre (JOC) – has come at a huge cost of almost R1 million to the university.

NSFAS was highlighted as the key driver of student strife. As of 1 March 2022, 27 449 students comprising 10 649 first time entrant (FTEN) and 16 800 returning students have had their 2022 funding confirmed while funding confirmation for 4 000 returning students remains outstanding despite numerous NSFAS enquiries. The scrapping of advance payments for 2022 until April is likely to be a great impediment to the disbursement of student monthly allowances and could exacerbate student strife.

DUT Student Representative Council briefing
Mr Onwabe Magadla, DUT SRC Deputy President, told the Committee that the student unrest was not only caused by students but there are other stakeholders that instigate the unrest. Late last year on 4 December, a vaccination policy was imposed on students. This policy gave students the choice either to vaccinate or they must get tested frequently to be allowed access to campus. This mandatory vaccination was imposed on all stakeholders of the institution. The institution understands a lot of students were still struggling with online learning and thus need to be on campus. This led to students sleeping outside the campus.

The SRC has attempted to engage management about registration. The registration period was planned to commence on 10 January until 11 February but due to delays caused by NSFAS and the incompetence of some of the staff, registration was still in progress while classes had already commenced. This resulted in frustration. The students were frustrated because they were expected to attend classes, but they had not received data or their allowances. Returning students were expected to attend classes but were not yet allocated residences.

The NSFAS funding list has not yet arrived, but the institution had closed the registration period while most returning students had not yet registered. The NSFAS guidelines were displeasing to both students and the landlords who are housing the students.

Some of the issues included the online learning and system, which was not sustainable. We do need to go back to what has happened before. There was a student who died in 2019 fighting for the rights of the students but the issues that led to that ordeal then were still occurring today. Students are not being coded; given their NSFAS allowances and tuition fees; students were also not being attended to, especially the student issues but these remained ignored on several accounts; the institution wants to pursue online learning and registration, but it is not stable, efficient and reliable.

The Registrar’s report said that 19 000 students have been allocated residences but as the SRC, this is a matter in dispute, and we will dispute it without fear. The SRC finds it difficult to intervene effectively and fully on student matters for fear of suspension. The Vice-Chancellor and the Registrar suspend SRC members for raising their voices. The SRC Secretary-General is currently suspended. The SRC cannot even submit a simple memorandum in the institution. The Vice-Chancellor and Registrar victimise SRC members. Even after this meeting, SRC members might receive calls and emails warning them not to put the institution in disrepute. But we are exposing what the institution is doing to our students. The SRC is here to represent students and most of the students in the institution were struggling. The SRC should be allowed to act for and represent students. There is even a court interdict imposed on the SRC by the institution. The SRC is completely paralysed because it cannot perform any of its roles on campus or hold meetings with students.

The SRC SG has been suspended since December over something that did not link him. He was also expecting a suspension letter from the Registrar for speaking this way with the Committee. DUT is fully aware of the issues affecting the SRC and the students. All correspondence attests to the attempts made by the SRC to be recognised and to be included. DUT has reached 70% of registration to date due to the assistance provided by the SRC but the SRC was still not acknowledged by management.

South African Union of Students (SAUS) briefing
Mr Lubabalo Ndzoyiya, SAUS President, spoke on registration closure; NSFAS funding decisions; appeals; student allowances; accommodation; student debt and the unions’ recommendations. Some of its recommendations to the sector were: extend the registration period; align academic calendars; engage Treasury for an advance; withdraw security forces on campus; release all arrested student leaders and establish an accounting structure for stakeholders.

The Committee Chairperson in concurrence with the SAUS presentation said that she would rather be arrested as well in advocating for fee-free higher education. The importance is ensuring that we all abide by the responsibilities that are granted to the right to protest. One is very concerned about the presentation from DUT because the right to protest is granted by our Constitution and the responsibility to do so must be in consideration of the rights of others.

University South Africa briefing
Dr Linda Meyer, USAf Director: Operations, presented the organisation’s position on the matter. USAf identified the factors that contributed to the current student unrest – student debt; fee increments; NSFAS delay in publishing 2022 eligibility criteria; funding for “missing middle” students; Covid-19 campus restrictions or mandatory vaccination; student accommodation and SRC political instability.

On student debt, USAf has on several occasions expressed its concern about the student debt burden owed to public universities. Student debt was confirmed at R14 billion in 2019 and is now estimated to be R16,5 billion (excluding NSFAS student debt that is dealt with separately).
The debt servicing cost is approximately R1,2 billion per annum, which could have been
directed at important university projects. At the beginning of 2021, the debt of students who were eligible to graduate was R7 billion, resulting in approximately 120 000 students being unable to graduate due to outstanding debt to universities.

Discussion
The Chairperson appreciated the stakeholders' presence. The nature of the work does not allow time to prepare due to the challenges at the beginning of the academic year in many institutions. Many contentious concerns are brought to the Committee’s attention at this time of the year.

She agreed with the DUT Vice-Chancellor to allow the Committee and stakeholders more time to engage on the matters crippling the institution and find ways to move forward. She encouraged Members to also come up with recommendations. UKZN needs to meet urgently with NSFAS to address the misalignment noted by the SRC and management and NSFAS must account. When was the last time the DUT SRC met with management and was the SRC allowed to attend meetings on the institutional platforms?

Ms C King (DA) said the crux of most of the unrest was due to late registration. She suggested that when the discussions are held, NSFAS must be brought on board to provide clarity on specific concerns that relate to it. NSFAS needs to address the misalignment between the institution registration schedule and the payment of monies to the institution. The Minister had indicated that all NSFAS students would be funded but we are yet to hear how the extra R32.6 billion for NSFAS would be spent and how it would impact the two institutions present today.

She asked UKZN what compelled most students not to return to campus. On mandatory vaccinations, she felt that a proper discussion with all stakeholders ought to be held to ascertain how this approach would impact students in accessing campus and dropping out due to a lack of trust in vaccines. She feared that at some stage we might lose up to 20% of the students due to this and because of online learning and lack of data, that will deny them access to high learning. She asked the SRCs if they had taken steps to safeguard their institutions and ensure they hold those creating mayhem accountable?

Ms J Mananiso (ANC) suggested that the Committee should meet with the South African Police Service about the lack of intelligence on student protests. It is critical to safety and security. We cannot be a reactive nation; we need to be proactive on such serious matters – we cannot respond after the fact.

She welcomed the recommendations made by SAUS, the SRCs and management. The Committee must provide a plan of action with timeframes for what is needed as feedback from the stakeholders when they respond to the challenges.

The recurring NSFAS ICT challenges cannot be allowed to happen anymore. It is an abnormality and NSFAS must address it because in some cases it relates directly to these protests.

We must deal with the external illegitimate forces so that the law can take its course. We cannot allow the destruction of property to continue. She asked UKZN what triggered the unrest? Was there no intervening stakeholder engagement to mitigate the unrest?

She asked the stakeholders if they held debriefing sessions after the unrest. From all the arrests made, are the people that get arrested repeaters?

Mr T Letsie (ANC) said that the Department would together a report on what leads to unrest in higher education institutions. Firstly, it confirms that NSFAS remains a critical institution for the stability of the PSET sector. The universities, students and USAf have indeed confirmed that without NSFAS funding the situation would be extremely bad. Many would not have the access to higher learning. We need to ensure that NSFAS is assisted to get it to a state where these challenges can be resolved swiftly. What came up today directly speaks to NSFAS – the late funding decisions. Students have also raised some concerns that directly speak to the management of institutions. Freedom of association for SRC members has been taken away by university management, which is a serious concern. Why is the SRC represented by its deputies?

In 2021 UKZN was here and the student leaders told the Committee that the torching and destruction of property on Westville Campus was not the students. They suspected it to be a syndicate that finds passage when legitimate students protest take place. Some of them are in the construction businesses and once property get destroyed, they are called in repair or rebuild destroyed property. Before the comprehensive report from the Department, the Committee should invite SAPS to speak about intelligence on student protests.

Both SRCs have clearly stated that they do not support destruction of university property, and this must be commended. They should take it a step further to openly inform students that if they are found destroying property will not be supported and will face the full might of the law. He supported the view that student leaders arrested for legitimate student protests must be released.

Online registration is a challenge for DUT students from remote areas or where connectivity is poor. How can these students be expected to register online? The university should have reconsidered and listened to student suggestions and adopted a hybrid registration model. He shared a personal experience about accessing a computer for the first time at university and can relate to the assertion made by the SRC of first-year students who have never used computers before yet are expected to register online. As we advocate for 4IR, we need to be realistic and find hybrid means to cater for all students.

When he was at UKZN, a lot of the students went to the university’s old residence but there was not enough student accommodation. A lot of leased accommodation or residences seem to have better infrastructure compared to university residences and if that is the case, students will prefer staying in residences where there are better facilities. He asked at VUT during the oversight visit, why they have not installed fibre so that the university can draw revenue from its residences instead of paying almost R345 million last year that was paid to external service providers. That would have been revenue for the university, but the question is, may this be connected to some criminality? One wonders because it did not make sense why the university was not investing in its residences and improving the infrastructure to attract students. The external residences should come in place when there is overcrowding or full capacity in the internal residences.

Mr Letsie asked both SRCs what could be done to reduce the protests. Can the institutions commit to meeting halfway and extending the registration period?

He was pleased with SAUS proposals and asked if it has considered discussing these with the Department. Is SAUS planning for 2023 already to avoid the same challenges. Is long term planning done?

To USAf, Mr Letsie said the DUT students are painting a "dictatorship kind of leadership". The Central University of Technology (CUT) students indicated the same concern to the Committee. We cannot be accused of fighting alongside students who are aligned to our political parties. We stand alongside students regardless of their political home. We must have a discussion with the Council for Higher Education on the number of graduates who are at home without jobs. He appealed to universities that when students have completed their qualifications, they must receive their qualification certificate. If they owe the institution, one can surely place a garnishee order on their salary when they start working. We cannot have these students at home without a certificate. How much of the student debt is interest accrued? How much of it is owed by students who have died? Is the R16.5 billion audited properly? This is something that we must interrogate.

A discussion was held with NSFAS last year and some of the student concerns raised today have come up before. We should have a discussion with NSFAS, SAUS and USAf to get a sense of when these concerns will be addressed. NSFAS often attributes payment delays to the institutions, but you find that institutions come before the Committee and say NSFAS is not paying timeously.

Lastly, East Coast Radio reported that teargas was deployed during the student protests. People called in and made these claims.

Dr N Khumalo asked about registration and how it affects the distribution of funding. The SRC noted challenges with data connectivity to access the online network. Does this not raise an alarm in this Committee; we need to ensure that students are not left behind. The Committee must encourage a hybrid system for registration. We need to hear the government taking responsibility for student access to the internet and where the country finds itself.

The recent KPMG audit findings cautioned against excessive use of a Strike Force; what level of responsibility have SAPS and POPS taken and what has been the remedies? Is there commitment for better preparation for any eventuality?

Ms N Marchesi (DA) said that she found it difficult to understand why we are unable to have protests that will not involve the destruction of property. Last year, the Minister indicated that the damage from protests across the country amounted to R32 million. For the SRC to say that NSFAS is to be blamed for the destruction of property is irresponsible. These are educated people and the students in universities must lead by example. Outcry and dissatisfaction should be brought up in a way that is cordial without destroying property. Are there discussions amongst SRCs across the country on this? It is, indeed, everyone’s constitutional right to protest but SRCs need to look at how they manage these protests to ensure they do not result in destruction of property.

How is UKZN handling vaccination? DUT said about 70% of students were vaccinated – could this provide herd immunity for the institution? Has DUT sat down with students who are reluctant to vaccinate to ascertain why these students are not vaccinating?

Ms Marchesi was impressed that USAf was looking at what degrees offered by universities are needed in the country in terms of qualifications and skills. What is the picture looking like on this – particularly for students not getting jobs and the kind of degree they possess? What degrees are most likely to get students jobs and which degrees are not attractive for the labour market?

She asked how active the universities were in finding suitable accommodation for students when their internal residences are at full capacity. There were also allegations of collusion between SRCs and student accommodation service providers outside the universities.

Ms D Sibiya (ANC) said that most stakeholders have cast the blame on NSFAS for student protests. She was not pleased with the destruction of property by student protests. Students must rise and stand against these acts of criminality. She also encouraged management to keep aloof from victimising students and sit down with them instead.

Ms D Mahlatsi (ANC) asked UKZN and DUT if there was consultation on their vaccination policy and what were the outcomes? What is their current position on vaccination?

During the Northern Cape oversight visit in January she asked NSFAS how it was planning to deal with registration in the institutions. The CEO replied that there were close engagements between NSFAS and institutions and the registrars. There are linkages in place for students awaiting approvals and they are mindful of the registration deadlines. What is the current status on this?

As much as one agrees with the proposal that no student should be left behind and to be accommodating of NSFAS challenges and extend registration, how will this impact the academic year? What is the commitment from SAUS to ensure that institutions are able to catch up?

On qualification certificates held back by the institution, it is important that SAUS, USAf and the Department have a discussion on this matter and then come back to the Committee on this. The SAUS proposal was sensible on student debt. The debt increases instead of being given the certificate in order to find employment and then repay the debt. She would have preferred to have the South African Further Education and Training Student Association (SAFETSA) present to represent TVET colleges. They should not have been left out of this conversation.

Ms Mahlatsi asked the Vice Chancellors to comment on student intimidation. SAUS speaks about the establishment of an accounting structure with stakeholders. She asked it to unpack this.

She spoke to the alignment of the academic year with government’s financial year. This is something that we should be able to investigate with the Department, Treasury and other stakeholders. She believed that if these two years were aligned, it would streamline and assist NSFAS to make timely payments and admissions.

The Chairperson asked how far NSFAS and UKZN are to project close-out. The same question applied to DUT. NSFAS had earlier provided a figure for the overall sector.

At UKZN, there an existing concession where the university provide a graduate's details to employers interested in absorbing a graduate into their workplace? Some institutions do not give the certificates to students when they owe the institution but will provide the academic transcript to that prospective employer.

Does each university have an accommodation plan to address the shortfall? In writing, it can provide the infrastructure projects that speak directly to the accommodation shortfall.

Private student accommodation needs to be accredited by the institution. He asked UKZN ad DUT if the SRC together with management view the accommodation before it gets accredited. Considering the challenges student face with private accommodation, one would assume that the institution is aware of the costs beforehand.

The SRC calls for blended learning. It has raised great concerns and ideas on this, but one would want to know if the institutions have assessed the success rate of blended learning.

Both the UKZN SRC and management allege that there are forces that de-legitimise student protest. Have stakeholders done any collaborative work with SAPS and campus security to identify these forces?

DUT management states that there are platforms made available for students and management to engage. Do the SRC and workers come to these platforms to engage with management? Do workers come to these platforms for engagement? Do these platforms truly exist and are these platforms fruitful? When last did the SRC and management engage on these stakeholder engagement platforms to address institutional challenges?

What are the enrolment targets for 2022? What informed the suspension of the SRC President and SG. Was a thorough investigation done to inform the reason they were suspended?

The Chairperson sought more details on the nature of the temporary student accommodation considering the rejections from the SRC and the student body. The SRC alluded to the death of a student based on their participation in the quest for access to higher education; did the student die during the protest? The SRC also alluded to a court interdict, what informed this court interdict and does the institution allow student activism to exist?

The Chairperson asked USAf and the Department what their role is if the concessions made during these engagements are not upheld up by institutions.

NSFAS response
Mr Thilivhali Mukondeleli, NSFAS Senior Manager: University Support, commenced with the 2022 NSFAS funding criteria, which were developed last year and all the stakeholders were engaged. The intention was to have the document ready at the beginning of the year, but the challenges started when NSFAS needed National Treasury to confirm the availability of funds. There was a hold-up and NSFAS was reluctant to release the funding criteria without confirmation about meeting the estimated funding shortfall from Treasury. This delayed the 2022 funding criteria release which was only released on 15 February, which was late because some institutions had already commenced with their registration period. NSFAS was not able to release the funded list, which was informed by the funding guidelines and the availability of funds. Before anything was communicated to the public, NSFAS needed to ensure that sufficient funds were available as per the estimation. When the confirmation came in, the funded list was released.

How NSFAS calculates N+ is informed by the data received from SAQA. If the data received from SAQA says that the qualification is for three years, NSFAS will use the three years as the base to calculate the N+. It is clear from the SRC presentation that indeed the N+ was applied incorrectly, to some medical students which was due to the incorrect information provided. UKZN needs to work with SAQA to update the correct number of minimum years to complete the qualification. NSFAS will then recalculate based on the correct data. At this moment, UKZN must initiate the process to rectify this with SAQA.

As for the 2017-2020 close-out report, UKZN submitted the files for these years, and we are at the resolution stage. NSFAS will soon contact UKZN and present its findings and solutions. DUT submitted from 2017 up to 2019. NSFAS was still missing 2020 and there are engagements taking place between NSFAS and DUT. It looks like there is an issue with the 2020 remittance. The team was working with DUT to have that addressed. Once this is done, a recommendation will be made on the resolutions.

DUT raised a concern about the scrapping of upfront payments. In the past, NSFAS used to make upfront payments to all institutions to advance student allowances. Unfortunately, it was not in the position to do so this due to the lack of funds in the reserves. The plan is that NSFAS will start processing payments after receiving tranches from Treasury. This has been communicated to all institutions and institutions were asked to make advance payments for student allowances if they are in a position to do so. Some of the institutions have already done so but NSFAS will reimburse those monies to the institutions.

There are students whose funding decisions were still pending due to several reasons. Some of these reasons included the lack of complete documents. NSFAS does not want to make the wrong funding decision because this will lead to un-funding the student if a wrong decision is made. NSFAS is forced to insist that these missing documents be submitted. Once the documents have been submitted and evaluated, they must be subject to South African Revenue Service (SARS) verification. For those who submitted on time, the funding decisions have been communicated. There were cases where some institutions submitted results very late due to the late ending of the 2021 academic year as some of the students wrote their exams in January 2022. Those institutions were made aware that because results were received late, NSFAS could not communicate the funding decisions on time as they needed to be assessed and verified.

We have several institutions where some of the qualifications were not correctly registered when the qualification was registered with SAQA. If there are cases like that, the institutions must engage with SAQA.

We have granted students permission to reset login details in the system. He noted the proposal to have a meeting with UKZN urgently and confirmed a meeting will be set up in the coming days.

NSFAS receives the registration data from institutions, which is a claim to NSFAS, and those claims inform NSFAS what needs to be paid for students.

Mr Mukondeleli said we have noted the recurring NSFAS ICT challenges and these will be elevated to management to respond to when it meets with the Committee in future. NSFAS will engage with the Committee in the coming days.

SAUS response
Mr Ndzoyiya replied that SAUS was in constant engagement with the Department of Higher Education and Traning (DHET) and engaging with almost every stakeholder to address all these challenges. SAUS recently had a meeting with DHET about these challenges. The Committee can assist in writing to DHET and advise that some of the decisions in the sector must be taken by the Department and to protect those decisions. For example, SAUS has discussed mandatory vaccinations with DHET and there was an agreement that Higher Health must draft guidelines in which all institutions are to be engaged. This will be the blueprint for how vaccinations will be dealt with in the sector. SAUS suggested that once these guidelines are created, Higher Health can create programmes that seek to educate and promote vaccinations. Mandatory vaccinations creates a wrong attitude towards vaccinations. However, there are institutions that have taken it upon themselves to make it mandatory to be vaccinated, ahead of national government. We are trying to engage with institutions on this and DHET must be at the centre of these engagements.

SAUS has also engaged with DHET to ensure that students receive their qualification certificate. The Minister has agreed with this resolution but the Minister changes tune. We need the Committee to assist us to ensure that these sector processes are monitored.

On planning for the 2023 academic year, SAUS is in the process of planning for that. Last year, we started with institutional visits to ensure that preparations for the 2022 academic year were underway. Most of the concerns encountered were already raised in 2021 by SAUS. Some of these concerns included the missing middle students, vaccinations and registration.

He advised the Vice-Chancellors that SRC elections are contested by the student society registered on campus. After the election, when an organisation wins, it does not take away the responsibility of the Dean of Students to engage with other student societies. What leads to conflict, is where the university refuses to engage with other student societies on the basis that they are not in the SRC.

All students who have been accepted by a university but are not yet registered, the IT system must create dummy passwords to allow them to access academic material so they are part of the progression to classes. The problem is that students are waiting for NSFAS verification yet classes have started. This solution has been done in some of the institutions.

As for establishing an accounting structure with stakeholders, we agree with USAf on certain issues but when you go to some institutions, the Vice-Chancellors do not comply with the resolutions that we reached with USAf.

There are students who have been placed temporarily in student accommodation as they are going through the registration process. Now, because the registration process is coming to an end, the students are evacuated because registration is closing and the university is giving up on those students. When the Committee invites USAf to this platform, Vice-Chancellors must be present. USAf must present in the presence of Vice-Chancellors so they are part of the resolutions taken here. We want a situation where all conflicts are minimised, especially those that could potentially lead to protests. We are encouraging universities to make spaces for engagement with student leaders and they must be included on the necessary platforms to avoid conflicts. Other structures must also be invited to those engagements to assist in facilitating engagement.

UKZN SRC response
Mr Malusi Zuma, UKZN SRC President, replied that the SRC has been covered by the engagements that have come up. The SRC position is clear on mandatory vaccinations, but we are not against vaccination. We would like students to be encouraged to vaccinate, instead of being compelled and forced to do so.

On the unrest in the university, we stand that the SRC has not held any protest this year. This is not the students doing and it pains us that whenever something happens, it comes back to the SRC as the perpetrator. The SRC is against the destruction of property, and we have been firm on this. There are external factors that are doing these things.

On residence matters, after this meeting, the SRC will sit with university management to try and find a way forward on resolving the residence challenges that students experience. There are a lot of "hands that are involved with wrong intentions" towards student accommodation. He also replied about bringing culprits forward, especially those involved in damaging the institution property.

UKZN Management response
Vice-Chancellor Poku replied that there were a lot of issues raised and those not responded to can be provided in writing. Management has been engaging with the SRC fruitfully and there are agreements in place that are binding, and those agreements are being honoured. It is unfortunate that there are other forces that are operating to destabilise the institution as well as the SRC. Even now, some of his staff members were being held hostage on one of the campuses, which disturbed him greatly. The reality is that as an institution of higher learning, we are not equipped to deal with this level of criminality. He was struggling to assure his staff that they are safe coming to work. We are not equipped to deal with the level of criminality that the institution has been subjected to. We are struggling to retain our ablest staff and train our upcoming bright staff because they do not want to be part of an environment that is not stable. Our students are traumatised. Yesterday we had a laboratory of students, not just interrupted by the hooligans, but kept hostage for a while. As we work hard to release them, the trauma is incalculable and the impact on their psyche might have long term effects, notwithstanding the physical damage which can be repaired over time.

Our registration is not randomly agreed upon; we have signed and reiterated the conversation with the student leadership and have agreed to it. The request from the Committee to extend the registration period is going to have a detrimental impact on the ability of the core programmes to be completed in this calendar year. It will also have significant defects in the years to come. He requested the Committee to refrain from this, but management will continue to work with the student leadership to find common ground. The progress in our registration is in line with all previous years and we have returning students. What is holding us back are the postgraduate numbers, which are low due to funding. We are committed to ensuring that students who are close to completing their registration will be catered for and we will open our modalities to all of them, so as the academic programme progresses, they will not be left behind. There is nothing more we can do to assist at the moment.

Whilst the call to make the registration hybrid is made in good faith, every time we attempt to bring a significant number of our staff to campus, they are terrorised and traumatised and have their cars burnt and are chased out of the workplace.

We have looked at some of these matters forensically and once that investigation is completed, the report will be made available to all the right stakeholders.

The Chairperson noted time constraints and asked that the remaining responses are succinct and high level and the details can be provided in writing.

DUT SRC response
Mr Thandokuhle Jele replied that the SRC condemns the violence happening on campuses. The SRC does not agree nor support such violent unrest. We are working together with the institution to ensure that such things do not happen again. As for the court interdict, this was granted on 18 February after the students flooded the institution following the alleged misleading statement that the institution was allowing in-person registration. The court interdict stated the SRC did not act by releasing a timely statement that management’s statement was misleading. We were then interdicted not to protest within a 150 metre range of the institution. This came as a surprise because the DUT SRC has never called for a protest or a mass meeting since the year started. An error was made here, but the interdict still stands. We are told the interdict expires on 17 March. The SRC was not allowed to call students for mass meetings and student gatherings on campus to brief students on matters affecting them.

The DUT SRC President was suspended for engaging the student admissions head, which is the Assistant Registrar. Later, that day, there were disruptions within the registration venue and laptops were damaged. This was then blamed on the SRC President and Treasury General because of the earlier engagement with the Assistant Registrar and simply because they lead the SRC. We were not surprised as this is something that has been happening at DUT for a long time to silence student leaders. The suspension came without a proper and coordinated investigation.

DUT Management response
Vice-Chancellor Mthembu replied that due to lack of adequate time to respond to all the issues, he will respond in writing to the Committee. These responses will include the NSFAS Close-Out issues dating back to 2017; accreditation of private accommodation; the structures and spaces of engagement and dates the engagements took place as well as decisions taken at those meetings; enrolment targets for 2022; and the current status and the pace of registration in previous years so the Committee can assess if DUT is falling short compared to previous years.

A lot has been said about the suspensions and one recognises that the SRC disassociates itself from the violence that takes place on campus, but management will provide details on why the President and the SG were suspended. Management will be careful as those cases are still ongoing.

The death of Mr Mlungisi Madonsela happened in February 2019. The university will provide more information about that and what the university has been doing. It is not a new matter; it dates back to February 2019.

Management will provide more information on the court interdict. As the SRC described, whenever we have a situation of people who break into the university venues – about 500 potential students or students – we cannot get SAPS or Public Order Policing to come in and help. SAPS always demands that the institution should have a court interdict for it to intervene. All of this will be explained and provided in writing.

Management will also provide an explanation on the vaccination choices policy DUT adopted and what has been provided to the university community to facilitate them in taking those different choices provided.

There will be more information on the status of registration. The university is at about 90% registration, which is not unusual compared to previous years. These cases are dealt with on a case-by-case basis.

The NSFAS challenges are a problem to many universities and there is no proper coordination. NSFAS unexpectedly announced that although student allowances is its responsibility, it cannot provide them until end of March. The institution does not get its government grant from December to the end of March. To have this responsibility foisted onto institutions with tight budgets is unfair and the Committee should investigate this.

The political and socio-economic issues brought up and collusion with external stakeholders, we would wish that government would assist us, especially those who want a piece of the pie from the institution right up to the level of ward councillors.

The broader issues associated with this is the intimidation and violent protests and overall culture of violent protests in the country. We find ourselves having the economy of KZN halted because people are unhappy and then protest violently. What happens in our institutions is an extension of the culture that already exists in the country.

Lastly, the institution requires coordination and collaboration from SAPS and POP – we need a lot of support from them. We do not get enough support from them. When something happens on the university premises, they have no role to play and we are told we are a private institution, but we understand ourselves to be a public institution. These facilities belong to this country. In fact, they should be seen as national key points. The damage and arson is turning state assets into ashes.

USAf response
Dr Meyer thanked the Committee for the opportunity to respond. We need the intervention of the Safety and Security cluster. It is incomprehensible that our students and members of staff are being subjected to levels of trauma they are not equipped to deal with.

She pleaded with the Committee to take this call seriously. USAf will provide its responses in writing.

DHET response
Dr Thandi Lewin, DHET DDG: University Education, said that it has been an important meeting. A lot of issues have come up and the detail of the discussion was critical in understanding at the level of universities the kind of challenges faced and the role we need to play at a national level in supporting institutions. It is devastating for us to see the kind of violence that we see and the effect that it has on public institutions, which are national treasures. Given the level of investment government makes in the sector, we hope to do everything we can to mitigate these problems. We all need to work together as stakeholders in the sector.

On student funding, a lot of the requests are illegitimate requests. There are systemic issues that have been raised by the stakeholders that must be addressed. Part of the problem we had over a couple of years is the demand on NSFAS budget and funding. We are grateful that we will be getting the funding shortfall as announced by the Minister of Finance. Working with Treasury, we have been able to secure the bulk of the shortfall over the Medium-Term Framework, which is important for the sector in the coming years. This means we will go into the coming years with more stability and ensure that the guidelines are released on time. The delay challenges are coming from the legacy of past challenges in addressing the funding shortfall. However, this does not mean that we cannot pursue a more comprehensive student financial aid model. Some of the policy instability does impact institutions at every level. The Department is committed to continue working on this.

The Chairperson requested DUT, UKZN, USAf, DHET and the SRCs to provide their further responses in writing by 7 March.

She recommended that NSFAS, DUT and UKZN in the presence of the Department have an urgent meeting to address the misalignment and fix the matters stifling progress. The unsustainable funding is affecting the entire value chain of the sector. The Committee will continue monitoring the work done by the Department and Treasury in addressing funding for the missing middle students. The shortfall in funding has a ripple effect on the sector. It affects the whole ecosystem, and we need to hasten the work done in stabilising funding for the sector.

The Committee advocates that funding assurance must align with the calendar and programmes of higher education institutions. NSFAS planning and programme must align with those of the institutions. The Committee will continue to hold stakeholders accountable in ensuring that the 2023 academic year programmes are aligned.

The Committee will also ensure that NSFAS appears before the Committee and that it also submits writing. We will implore DHET, USAf, the institutions and SAUS to investigate the alleged collusion of student/staff in private accommodation. Those found guilty must face the consequences of their wrongdoing.

We implore the institutions, SAPS and the Department to investigate the supposed third forces that de-legitimise student protests. Perhaps, the Committee will write to SAPS to account for the criminality that has been seen in the student protests. We need also to assess the guidelines of how institutions play their role in student protests.

On students not receiving their qualifications, she implored the Department and USAf to discuss a way forward but at the core of this is the lack of funding for tuition. For us to see change, we must afford them the opportunity to participate in the economy in order to pay that debt off as they work.

She implored DUT SRC and management to meet urgently and thereafter report to the Committee on where they are able to find common ground. She suggested the Department should also be involved. UKZN should consider having stakeholder engagements on mandatory vaccinations.

We need to turn to the Department of Health and see how it can assist on mandatory vaccinations in our institutions and mediating the unrest we are seeing on this. We also need to find a way of balancing inclusive engagement with the SRC in our institutions. It was refreshing to see that the UKZN SRC and management have an amicable relationship.

Who are the people in our institutions who are committing these crimes in the name of student grievances? These people must be named and shamed – as well as cases of gender-based violence and other types of serious offences. We need to see better collaboration in our institutions.

She requested the Department to make a thorough analysis of institutions that may need the extension of registration and present it to the Committee. The Department should play its oversight role in this to ensure that no student is left behind.

The meeting was adjourned.