Unisa now needs to act fast if it is not further to insult, degrade and humiliate Professor Margaret Orr and all the women of South Africa.
In the week the country celebrates Women’s Day, we reveal that Unisa has already been paying some of the legal costs incurred by its chairperson of council, McCaps Motimele, in the sexual harassment and defamation case Orr brought against him.
The appalling personal toll the two-and-a-half-year ordeal has wreaked on Orr was heard in court last week — her career at Unisa destroyed, her health devastated, her children traumatised, her marriage stressed.
Unisa is a public institution accountable for its use of public money. We do not understand why our money has been used for the grimiest of purposes. We also do not understand how Unisa can be considering whether it should pay Motimele’s settlement costs of R150 000, as vice-chancellor Barney Pityana this week revealed it was.
From Motimele himself, not one public word of sorrow, remorse or contrition has been heard. On the contrary, he bounded out of court last week, smiling broadly, and, cynically, set about trying to present himself as a victim of transformation at Unisa.
Intellectually and morally void, his bluster in this regard shows an obscene contempt and disregard for the rights of women, and should make South African men cringe.
Transformation in higher education includes racial and gender considerations. That is government policy. It is also — at least rhetorically — the policy of every tertiary institution in the country.
Self-styled champion of transformation that he is, Motimele appears not to have noticed this. On these grounds alone, we suggest that he is unfit to be at the helm of the highest decision-making body of the country’s largest university.
We salute Orr’s extraordinary courage. She has struck a powerful blow for human rights from which South African women will surely benefit as the struggle for gender equity continues.
No better than the rest
The Democratic Alliance has shot itself in the feet so often over the funny money of German tycoon Jurgen Harksen that it is a case for double amputation. The latest self-injury is the Cape Town council’s appointment of Erik Marais, a possible suspect in a criminal probe into money laundering recently sacked by Absa for a dodgy foreign exchange transaction.
Marais has admitted laundering DM90 000 into DA accounts in instalments, and surrendering the remaining foreign exchange he received in a plain envelope to the Scorpions. He has now been hired as the personal assistant of DA executive committee member David Erleigh, who insists he is the best man for the job and must be presumed innocent until found guilty. Cape Town mayor and DA Western Cape leader Gerald Morkel sees nothing irregular in the appointment, and is said to have barred discussion of Marais at a caucus meeting this week.
How banking experience and,more specifically, dishonourable discharge by a major bank qualifies Marais for the job in question is unclear. But the larger issue is Erleigh’s legalistic defence of the appointment, which ignores the damaging political message to the electorate.
It makes nonsense of the DA’s call for the suspension of Tony Yengeni as African National Congress chief whip before his trial. And it suggests that once in power, the morally strident DA is indistinguishable from other parties, whose overriding priority is to protect their own.
Not-so-smart Alec
Three years ago the Cabinet announced its decision to blow billions on fighter jets, helicopters, ships and submarines. Justifying the decision, it said it was “fully satisfied regarding the offset arrangements attached to this package, which will benefit the economy and advance the socio-economic interests of the country”.
For those concerned with issues of socio-economic impact greater than the satisfaction of a few generals and arms traders, the Cabinet’s assurances may have provided some solace: at least, according to official estimates, 65 000 jobs would have been created as a result of investments that would have offset the arms expenditure.
But that was not the only assurance. The Cabinet’s same initial announcement spoke of a R21,3-billion total cost, with, by the way, an option to buy extra jets bringing the total to R29,9-billion. It was soon clear the government had every intention to exercise that option — and in his last Budget speech Minister of Finance Trevor Manuel acknowledged the total cash price had escalated to R52,7-billion.
This week we show just how suspect government leaders’ assurances of massive investment were, and just how disingenuous the accounting rules of the responsible department, Trade and Industry, to perpetuate the lie of significant socio-economic benefit.
Next week Parliament debates the arms deal again. It is time to come clean.