The process of electing a new vice-chancellor has been steeped in irony, but finally students and staff have a spring in their step, writes Philippa Garson
IN the space of a few months the University of the Witwatersrand has, against all expectation, picked up its scattered pieces and moulded a fragile new unity for itself. Last Sunday the selection committee picked Sam Nolutshungu to lead the institution into the 20th century. Exactly a year ago – also the last Sunday in October – Sunday newspapers revealed how 13 academics had moved to unseat then heir-apparent William Makgoba.
Their action set off the rapid unravelling of one of South Africa’s premier universities. A seemingly endless cycle of witch-hunts, threatened resignations, student protests and stormy midnight meetings polarised Wits into an increasingly miserable example of “transitional disaster”.
One academic embroiled in the “Makgoba saga” committed suicide, two suffered severe heart problems and two others resigned. Whether the vicious fights triggered these events is unknown, but clearly the stress took its toll on the entire institution.
Now, for the first time in a long period, academics, students and staff are walking with a new spring in their step, singing the same praise song for the man who will most likely be the university’s new leader.
The Senate and Council must still ratify the selection committee’s 61% majority decision for Nolutshungu to take the helm: of 28 votes, 17 went to him, 10 to Deputy Vice- Chancellor June Sinclair and one to University of the North Vice-Chancellor Njabulo Ndebele. But his appointment appears to be a near-fait accompli, with a vote against this unprecedented celebration of unity between staff and students looking unlikely.
The whole process has been steeped in irony: six of the academics who moved to oust Makgoba last year were on this week’s selection committee; the “progressive alliance” who had wooed a reluctant Ndebele to enter the race then overlooked him; and a rank outsider with slightly Africanist leanings won the day – despite the disastrous consequences of the appointment of another politically threatening “outsider” (in Makgoba) still fresh in the minds of most.
What looked set to be a clear fight between the other two candidates, Sinclair and Ndebele, turned out to be nothing of the sort. With his outstanding public address and solid handling of the questions pitched at him, Nolutshungu literally stole the show.
“He shone; he lit up the room,” said an academic close to the selection process. “People were excited and exuberant and motivated for the first time – they bounced in the corridors after hearing him speak.
“With his conventional concept of academic freedom, his political independence and clear sense of how a university should operate and his obvious commitment to transparency and inclusivity, he managed to unify all the sectors.”
Nolutshungu, who studied at Fort Hare and then spent his academic career in the United States, Canada, Britain and Nigeria, was labelled an “outsider” from the start and did not get much attention. But he is a respected political scientist who has made significant contributions to understanding South Africa’s apartheid-era foreign policy and is involved in a key think-tank of African intellectuals, the Council for Development of Economic and Social Research in Africa, examining the continent’s problematic transition to democracy.
His “suss” became apparent to all who listened to him. He is steeped in the politics of the place yet his hands are free from the baggage of parochial in-fighting. This, and his respect for academic autonomy and commitment to ensuring Wits as a centre of excellence, won over the “middle ground” academics alienated by Ndebele’s discourse on higher education transformation which tended to subjugate the interests of Wits to the broader goals.
When the “progressive alliance” of academics, students and workers on the committee who intended voting for Ndebele saw this, they changed tack and decided to put their weight behind Nolutshungu rather than cause a split vote between Nolutshungu and Ndebele and risk a victory for Sinclair. Those who had wooed Ndebele buried their political inclinations and opted for pragmatism.
What Nolutshungu lacks in administrative experience he makes up for in charisma and leadership abilities – qualities perhaps more crucial in navigating a path through the choppy waters of transition. “Nolutshungu is clearly a man who can learn things very quickly. He is sharp and shrewd,” said another source.
An academic close to Anne Letsebi, a member of the selection committee and of Thabo Mbeki’s kitchen cabinet, scotched a report that she had orchestrated the Nolutshungu lobby and in the end pushed an African National Congress agenda. “She worked as a team-worker with others in the progressive alliance,” said the source.
Ndebele’s downfall, it seems, was his beholden stance to the ANC’s vision for higher education, despite his reputation for political independence. Clearly, he was the ANC’s choice and had the backing of President Nelson Mandela.
But the “middle ground” academics saw this as a possible threat to academic autonomy. And his transformation talk, albeit sincere, “was solid but fundamentally threatening to Wits”.
Furthermore, Ndebele is not a man who plays to an audience. In a highly transparent process where public performance counted a great deal, he was “naked”, as one academic put it; his performance was lacklustre. Those who backed him for his leadership calibre and his ideas, chose Nolutshungu instead to save the institution from Sinclair. “It was about keeping Sinclair out,” said another academic.
Sinclair, who has impressive administrative experience, is regarded, however, as having an adversarial management style. “There would have been trouble if she was appointed and the academics knew it,” commented a senior academic.
Others were not impressed with her “trendy management theory of re-engineering the university and gearing it towards the market”, said sociologist Glen Adler. One member of the public asked if she planned to turn the university into a “spaza shop”.
If Nolutshungu gets the job, Sinclair’s future is uncertain. Her term of office expires at the end of the year and rumours abound that she is tipped to lead Crawford College’s proposed university venture. She was not available for comment.
Outgoing vice-chancellor Robert Charlton, who retires at the end of next year, described the process so far as “taking transparency and democracy all the way – a great plus for the university”.