Parliament committee calls for independent assessor to give UCT governance probe credibility

MPs have questioned the credibility of a damning report on a governance crisis at the University of Cape Town (UCT), insisting it be reviewed by an independent external assessor.

Parliament's committee on higher education, science and innovation on Wednesday interrogated the report by an independent panel chaired by former Supreme Court of Appeal president judge Lex Mpati.

The panel made scathing findings about the divisive leadership of former vice-chancellor Mamokgethi Phakeng.

MPs said UCT's management and council were clearly not in sync with each other and there seemed to be a “trust deficit” between the two, and among staff and students, with incoherence on understanding UCT's policies and statutes. 

During the meeting at UCT’s Bremmer building, attended by senior management, council, staff and student representative council (SRC) members, MPs said the report didn’t inspire confidence due to the process followed which seemed to favour certain factions within UCT.

The committee said it would recommend to higher education and training minister Blade Nzimande that an independent assessor be appointed to review the report.

In the meeting, which got heated at times, MPs questioned the veracity of the report, saying only a review by an independent assessor would give it credibility. They said a failure to give Phakeng and former council chairperson Babalwa Ngonyama an opportunity to respond to allegations against them was a test the panel had to pass, which could ultimately exonerate them in the end, despite their alleged governance failures.

Committee chair Nompendulo Mkhatshwa expressed concern about the language used in the report, saying phrases where staff were labelled as “Phakeng supporters” did not inspire confidence and implied bias. 

“Many of us are sitting here and battling to see the objectivity in the report. It doesn't look objective, it doesn't feel objective. And because the process that was followed is also under question, it's inevitable that it's going to look biased. It's going to look racially induced. It looks sexist ... it just looks wrong,” she said.

“It looks factional ... it doesn't look objective. The sentiment of the committee is that we don’t have confidence in the panel, its terms of reference and what it sought to do, we don’t have confidence of what it actually did and the outcomes of its work. There are questions that had not been answered.” 

UCT council chair Norman Arendse last week apologised for the council not exercising its fiduciary responsibilities timeously or acting in the best interests of the university. 

On October 28 the council adopted the panel's findings and recommendations on governance issues at the institution between 2018 and 2022. 

“An example was the failure of the council to act appropriately in relation to the report from the previous ombud, which resulted in an exodus of senior staff. We recognise that had the council at the time fulfilled its governance role as required, the events that unfolded and emotional trauma to many individuals could have been avoided,” said Arendse. 

The report was critical of Phakeng, who left earlier this year after a multimillion-rand golden handshake, amid allegations of a governance crisis and bullying.

Phakeng not only saw people around her through a primarily racial lens but applied racial labels that discriminated against people who, in her view, were insufficiently “black”, the report stated. 

At the meeting on Wednesday Prof Elelwani Ramugondo, deputy vice-chancellor responsible for transformation, student affairs and social responsiveness at UCT, provided a glimpse into UCT's lack of transformation, telling MPs the university had no committee making decisions on transformation issues. It merely had a transformation forum, which was a subcommittee with no decision-making powers.

She said staff were concerned that when it came to employment and recruitment, responsibility to transform was left to individuals who were mostly junior people and merely advised the council on transformation matters.

“Decision-making is what drives institutional culture. You tell me, how can an employment equity representative who is junior really drive employment equity for an institution?”

Out of 262 professors at UCT, Ramugondo said only nine were black, 107 were white and 93 were foreigners. She said out of 39 staff dismissed at UCT only one white female was affected.

“Yes, transformation is not only about the demographic composition of an institution. It's much more than that. But given our history, where we do not really know each other across racialised identities, you have to worry about the knowledge project when you have people missing who are representative of the broader majority.”

Mkhatshwa accused the council of not answering certain questions such as UCT's vice-chancellor succession plan, about the filling of critical posts, and acting defensively when it came to matters of transformation, accusing Arendse of brushing off issues and not having stakeholder meetings to engage staff on things that made them and students unhappy. 

“What you did now was politicking. You just covered surface-level issues. There were some direct questions that you did not respond to. No matter how great your managerial skills may be, if you aren’t able to bring your entire collective on board, then you are not really meeting your ultimate potential.”

DA MP Chantel King criticised the UCT executive for being silent when alleged indiscretions were committed by Phakeng, saying the report “overshadowed” things like UCT's clean audit. 

“When you read the report, it actually overshadows the audit report and outcomes that you have received,” King said.

“You were told that she might not be fit for purpose for the current position. You had that report, you had an ombudsman report. We spoke about her behaviour. You are silent on that. I don't think you're bold enough to take over issues that affect transformation and issues that will taint the image of this institution.

“You are doing it in the best interest of this institution, but by keeping silent, you are actually defeating the very purpose of the best interest of this institution.”

She said it looked like the council was afraid to deal with Phakeng and her alleged wrongdoing. 

“I will wholeheartedly agree on an independent assessor report. I think maybe we need to delve deeper. We had numerous institutions with governance issues that come before us and there hasn't really been much discussion around governance in the sector at all.” 

There was a clear mismatch in the investigation and terms of reference, King said, and the process looked flawed, with possible conflict of interest where some UCT council staff gave evidence and reviewed the same report. 

In a statement Arendse acknowledged “the right of stakeholders to call for the appointment of an independent assessor to test the veracity of the report”.

“We do not believe this process should stall or hinder UCT using the report as a road map to guide it towards a future marked by accountability and transparency, and a renewed commitment to strengthen the governance of the university. The UCT council stands by the findings of the independent panel of investigation and will be implementing its recommendations,” Arendse said.

“Transformation is one of the pillars of the university’s 2030 vision and strategy. We take transformation seriously.”

TimesLIVE