Unisa has been footing some of the legal bill for McCaps Motimele’s defence in the case of sexual harassment brought by Professor Margaret Orr.
Orr based her action on the alleged violation of her rights to physical integrity, dignity, self-esteem, privacy, peace of mind and equality, based on the Constitution and the common law. She also alleged that Motimele defamed her in violation of her right to her good name and reputation.
The Unisa council chairperson offered Orr a settlement of R150 000. After giving testimony in the Johannesburg High Court for nearly the whole day on
Friday last week, Orr accepted the settlement.
The amount Motimele offered is nearly double the amount the high court normally offers in cases of this kind, says Pamela Stein of Cheadle, Thompson & Haysom, Orr’s attorneys.
”Orr was therefore at risk not only for her own costs but Motimele’s as well — even if she had won the case. She had very little choice.”
Concerning Motimele’s own legal costs, vice-chancellor Barney Pityana told the Sunday Times last weekend that Motimele’s interests were not the same as Unisa’s and ”under no circumstances” did Unisa want to create the impression that it was defending Motimele.
Unisa has also denied liability in Orr’s case of constructive dismissal, pending before the Labour Court, on the basis that Motimele’s alleged misconduct was not sanctioned by Unisa and constitutes ”private and personal acts on his part, unconnected with his duties and functions as chairperson of council and fall outside the course and scope of his position”, according to Unisa’s court papers.
Orr was employed at Unisa for more than 20 years.
The Mail&Guardian has learnt that by the end of January Unisa had made several payments, totalling nearly R600 000, to Nalane Manaka Attorneys for representation in two legal actions, and that one of them involved representing Motimele in Orr’s case.
Unisa cheques were used to make these payments, the M&G has been told, and the payments commenced before Pityana took office in November.
”This sends completely the wrong message,” says Lisa Vetten, gender coordinator at the Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation. ”If Unisa is paying, it’s supporting [Motimele] against [Orr].”
The Sunday Times also reported that Pityana denied Unisa had decided to pay Motimele’s legal bill; and that a three-member committee, including himself, still had to decide whether the university would pay.
But e.tv reported on Friday that Motimele ”had claimed the university was paying to avoid further embarrassment” and that ”the settlement was not his
but the university’s decision”.
On Tuesday Pityana issued a statement to Unisa staff via the university’s internal e-mail saying that the council hoped shortly to reach a decision on
whether to pay the settlement of R150 000. The statement makes no reference to payments to Motimele’s attorneys.
Neither Motimele nor Pityana responded to the M&G’s detailed questions about these payments.