Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
The Academic Freedom Committee would like to express its profound concern that the University of
KwaZulu-Natal is proceeding with disciplinary action against Professors Nithaya Chetty and John van den
Berg in their Science and Agriculture faculty. As those who have followed press reports will be aware, the
disciplinary action is based on Professors Chetty and Van den Berg speaking out against Vice-Chancellor
Makgoba's omission of a document on academic freedom from Senate as well as their articulation to the
media criticisms of the institution. Alan Rycroft, the law professor representing Chetty and Van den Berg,
summarises the three charges being levelled against the two academics in Science and Agriculture as
follows: "(a) failing to take due care in communicating with the media; (b) breaching the confidentiality of
Senate; and (c) dishonesty and/or gross negligence in alleging that the Vice Chancellor had no right to
omit the Faculty of Science and Agriculture document on academic freedom from the Senate agenda."
The Academic Freedom Committee at Rhodes University would want to reiterate sentiments expressed in
a press release by the Freedom of Expression Institute on 7 November. "Academics", the press release
notes, "should be encouraged to play a public intellectual role, not punished for it". Referring to a recent
report on institutional autonomy and academic freedom, the Freedom of Expression Institute also notes:
"The authors of the report argue that if academic freedom is to be realised, higher education institutions
must 'protect the freedom of expression of academics...from undue sanction by their own institution'.
This means affording academics the space to espouse unpopular views on general matters or even in
relation to the university administration, without threats of disciplinary action. The report also notes that
'Senates, as institutional bodies, are bound to uphold the right of individual academics to freedom of
expression and freedom of scientific research'."
Brenda Schmahmann
As Chairperson of the Senate Academic Freedom Committee at the University of the Witwatersrand,
Johannesburg, I am writing to you in connection with recent events at the University of KwaZulu-Natal
which have been reported in the press and which are being widely discussed amongst academic
colleagues both in South Africa and abroad. These events involve the names of Professors Nithaya
Chetty and John van den Berg, and their efforts to have an official Science Faculty proposal on Academic
Freedom included in your Senate’s agenda, as well as their comments in the media. We understand that
these colleagues face disciplinary charges for their actions. With great respect, I wish to state that
members of the Wits Academic Freedom Committee, and other colleagues, are deeply concerned by
these developments. In order for the country as whole to thrive, we require world-class universities which
can feed the economy and society with intellectual energy and innovation. Academic freedom sits at the
very heart of this project since it is critical to innovation and excellence. You will be very well aware of the
dreadful consequences of restriction on academic freedom in numerous parts of the world over many
decades, and perhaps more importantly, aware of the strong connection between academic freedom and
the success of scholarship in the world’s leading universities.
Information available indicates, disturbingly, that events at UKZN appear to reflect little respect in some
quarters for academic freedom.
An environment in which debate about the very nature and course of academic freedom is stifled, cannot
be one in which scholarship flourishes.
Available information further indicates that threats of dismissal have been held over the heads of your
University’s critics in this matter. A Faculty Board meeting to discuss the issue has apparently been
cancelled. We are told that the scholars concerned must pay for their own defence: their resources
cannot possibly match those of UKZN. This inequity surely undermines any question of academic
freedom and its adjudication. We are well aware of the complexities of circumstances at all of our
institutions. Yet a demonstration of commitment to open debate and an environment of unfettered inquiry
would surely do all of us much more good than attempts to restrict discussion. The recent Council for
Higher Education report on academic freedom reinforces our sense that positive action in support of the
concept and practice is essential. In the broader interests of South African higher education and
especially the vital concern of academic freedom, we would urge your University to rethink its approach to
the matters referred to, and to make clear its commitment to freedom of inquiry and debate. I append to
my signature below, the names of colleagues at Wits who at short notice have expressed their desire to
be associated with this communication of our views. The Wits Academic Staff Association and the
Administrative and Library Staff Association also endorse this letter.
Yours sincerely
Alan Mabin
Chairperson: Wits Senate Academic Freedom Committee