/ 19 November 2004

Technikon boss’s anti-Indian rant

Indian and white employees at Mangosuthu Technikon came under attack from their vice-chancellor (VC), Professor Aaron Ndlovu, last week. And Durban mayor Obed Mlaba — also chairperson of the technikon’s council — supported him.

Ndlovu spoke on Thursday last week at a memorial service for the late Sandile Thusi, a former member of Mangosuthu’s council. Also present at the service were Mangosuthu Technikon chancellor Reverend Dr KEM Mgojo, vice-principal Dr YL Mbele, council members, staff, students and community members.

Two senior technikon staffers, whose names are known to the Mail & Guardian, made notes of Ndlovu’s and Mlaba’s addresses. Their written notes were delivered to the M&G this week.

Ndlovu spoke in English and isiZulu. Speaking in English, he said Indians working at the technikon do not allow their children to study there, but rather send them to white institutions. This, he claimed, shows the attitude Indians have toward the technikon and towards himself.

Indians have no respect for black people, he said. He provided a personal anecdote: an ”Indian girl” at a shop in Gateway shopping centre (in Durban) did not put change into his hand after serving him but instead put it on the counter. ”She did not want to touch my hand — this little Indian girl is sick,” he said.

Speaking in isiZulu, Ndlovu said the attitude of Indians on campus supports playwright and theatre director Mbongeni Ngema’s public statements on the attitude of Indians towards blacks.

The whites who work at the technikon show no interest in this institution, Ndlovu said, nor do they support him. They subscribe to the Democratic Alliance’s ideologies.

Still in isiZulu, he said Indians need to apologise to the Council of Mangosuthu Technikon for their attitude and behaviour.

Ndlovu said he was speaking now and so ”creating a debate”.

Speaking after Ndlovu, Mlaba said, among other things, that he supported what Ndlovu had said about the DA and Indians.

Ngema appalled many when, in 2002, his song AmaNdiya was released.

The lyrics suggest Indians in KwaZulu-Natal exploit Africans. When Alfred Maphala, an African National Congress MP, demanded he apologise, he at first refused, saying the song ”will inspire a healthy debate” about ”the reality of this country”.

Nelson Mandela met Ngema, after which Ngema recanted, saying the song went ”too far … I would like to allay the fears of the Indian community. My message was received wrongly.”

The two staff members who made notes of Ndlovu’s and Mlaba’s speeches have formally requested the Mangosuthu branch of the National Union of Technikon Employees of South Africa (Nutesa) to ask the technikon’s council and Ndlovu ”to apologise to the Indians and whites on campus for making racist remarks and creating conflict between races on campus”.

The Mangosuthu branch of Nutesa, whose members are mostly black, told the M&G it has repeatedly challenged Ndlovu in a variety of ways and on many issues (such as staff suspensions, firings and unusual disparities in salaries) since he was appointed VC in 1997. The union has also repeatedly asked the government to intervene and provided it with lengthy documentation, and has got nowhere.

In 1999 violence broke out on campus while students were protesting in an attempt to get the technikon to settle its dispute with staff members who were striking on several grounds — especially Ndlovu’s decision in 1998 to exclude Nutesa from council meetings and his cancelling of the union’s right to hold meetings on campus during lunchtimes.

About 360 staffers — 65 of them white — went on strike for four weeks (the technikon had about 450 staff in total then). Security guards used rubber bullets and live ammunition; several staff and students were wounded.

Then education minister Kader Asmal appointed Professor Jaap Durand — former deputy vice-chancellor at the University of the Western Cape — to investigate.

Durand’s comprehensive report to Asmal said: ”I do not see the possibility of restoring effective academic and administrative functioning while [Ndlovu] remains in office.” Of the council, he said, ”it failed in proper governance by not taking the responsibility for the decisions of [Ndlovu] … and the consequences thereof.”

Durand also referred to Ndlovu’s ”cronies” who receive preferential treatment and protection from him.

In October 1999 the council decided not to follow the Durand recommendation to dismiss Ndlovu. This caused further controversy, with Nutesa pointing out that in 1997, when the Technikons Act changed, a new council was appointed. The union’s argument has always been that Mangosuthu’s council is packed with ANC members.

Before Ndlovu became VC, he was an ambitious contender for high office in the ANC.

Mlaba and Ndlovu respond

Obed Mlaba’s response to questions the M&G sent about both the stories on this page was: ”An answer to all your questions is simple. As chairperson of Mangosuthu Technikon, I cannot stoop so low and handle would be matters [sic] of this institution outside its relevant structure particularly when your questions suggest this newspaper seems to be conducting a probe against the vice-chancellor, Prof Aaron Ndlovu.

”The institution has, as other institutions may have, its mechanisms to deal with matters properly brought it. In this instance, the M&G seem to know something we might not know. If there [are] such matters, let those with such information bring it through correct channels. If there is crime, let those with information report it to the police for investigation and allow the technikon to deal with its business.”

Ndlovu replied: ”Initially I assumed, but now I know, that the vicious attack against me by your paper has a party political angle.

”The article you claim to have received is grossly inaccurate and quite pejorative. When I learned that some Indian members of staff expressed concern about the remarks I made at the memorial service, I invited them through the offices of the senior director [of] marketing and communications to come forward to discuss whatever concerns they may have.

”None of them accepted this invitation. It appears to me that there are certain elements whose sympathy with the political party you allude to [who] have deliberately misconstrued the issues I raised.”