September 20, the 2nd official day of protesting at the University of the Free State, bore witness to the rise of factions and chasms among the student body. The Student Representative Council called a student mass meeting at 1pm to establish a specific purpose for the protest as well as to negotiate necessary logistics for the week long university shut down.
What ensued were heated arguments and raised fists between members of various associations and the SRC president Lindokhule Ntuli. Ntuli opened the mass meeting by presenting the assembled students with two proposals from which to adopt a course of action. “Our proposal as the SRC is that we protest for 0% fee increment against the institution and then protest against the government for free education.” Ntuli then mentioned the second proposal, brought forth by various UFS associations and constituencies. “Our second proposal is that we protest for free education only and that we continue the shut down until the demand for free education has been met.”
The students raised various concerns about both courses of action and animated debate followed Ntuli’s proclamations. Some students appeared to be concerned about the security of their studies if they committed themselves wholly to the fight for free education.
“What about my family back home? This degree is not just for me, it’s for my family as well. What happens if I decide to participate and then I lose out on my degree?” said one student.
Another raised the issue that fighting for a 0% fee increment would result in more protest action in the months and years to follow. “Our problem is that we cannot afford the fees already. Come January or next year December we will be fighting for the same thing again. We might as well make striking an annual event,” said the student.
Current SRC treasurer Katleho Masheane then addressed the students, repeating the courses of action and then stating the implications of each one. Once she had completed addressing the students, Ntuli asked those assembled to vote for the proposal of their choice. The students voted, and by majority rule, the students opted for the SRC’s proposal.
Chaos erupted and members from associations in favour of the fight for free education advanced towards Ntuli with the intention of committing bodily harm. The members of the associations were enraged, claiming that Ntuli had deliberately sabotaged the fight for free education because the previous evening at a meeting between the associations and Ntuli, according to them, Ntuli had clearly stated his agreement with the proposal.
“At the meeting last night we all agreed that we would protest for free education only. We even prepared the speech of what Lindo was supposed to say at this meeting. We had all agreed on fighting for free education and not 0% fee increment. We don’t understand what he’s doing now,” said EFFSC chairperson Liza Mfana.
Former SRC president (circa 2013/2014) Phiwe Mathe was enlisted to assist in facilitating a discussion between those in favuor of fighting for free education and those in favor of fighting for a 0% fee increment. Three rounds of questions and opinions were taken from the assembled students and association members and in the end it was agreed that students would proceed with the fight for free education and shut down of the campus indefinitely until such time that the demand for free education has been met by the government. When the meeting was adjourned it was assumed that all had been resolved and that a way forward had been established, however this was not so.
The SRC released a statement in the evening, saying the following: “The SRC is calling the protests off as they have shown the propensity to become violent and uncontrollable.” The statement then went on to allude to threats of assault made towards students who had opted not to join the strikes, and plans to forcefully remove non-striking students from residences. The SRC denounced these threats, stating that “we have a duty to protect the life and limb of our fellow students.”
The statement went on to further mention that the occurrences at the Student Lekgotla were a contravention on the SRC’s jurisdiction and a manipulation of their platform by political associations to push their own mandates and agendas. The SRC concluded the statement saying “The SRC cannot at any point overstress that the safety of our fellow students is paramount and cannot be passenger to what may lead to any student being harmed.”
