Manamela names assessor to scrutinise problems at University of Venda

The department of higher education and training has appointed academic Norman Duncan to investigate problems besetting the University of Venda.

Duncan was credited with a similar clean-up process at the Central University of Technology four years ago.

On Tuesday, higher education minister Buti Manamela appointed Duncan as an independent assessor to look into the university’s affairs. Duncan is the former vice-principal at the University of Pretoria.

He will be expected to look into decisions of the university’s council — the highest governance structure at the university — relating to the “precautionary suspension process and litigation affecting the university and its capacity to discharge its statutory responsibilities”.

Duncan will also probe the functioning of the council and executive management, the relationship between the two, and how the interaction affects the governance and administration of the university.

The financial decisions and concessions made by the council, including legal fees and their effects on the financial sustainability of the university, will also be under scrutiny.

Manamela said Duncan’s appointment does not constitute the appointment of an administrator and does not displace the university council or executive management from their lawful responsibilities.

“The appointment of an independent assessor is not a punitive measure and should not be interpreted as a finding against any individual or structure of the university. It is an independent fact-finding process intended to establish the facts and assist us in determining what measures, if any, are required to strengthen governance and management at Univen,” Manamela said in a statement.

“Our overriding responsibility is to protect the academic mandate of the university and the interests of its students, staff and the broader public. The university must remain focused on teaching, learning, research and student support while this process is under way.”

In July, Manamela put the university on notice when he asked the council to furnish him with reasons he should not appoint an independent assessor to conduct an investigation into the institution’s affairs.

This followed the university’s decision to suspend vice-chancellor and principal Bernard Nthambeleni and COO Botwe Kraziya. Their suspension followed allegations of corruption, maladministration and nepotism.

“Having considered those representations, together with the information before him, the minister determined that an independent assessment is warranted to establish the source and nature of the governance and management challenges facing the university and to advise on measures required to strengthen good governance and management,” the department said.

The governance challenges facing the university come as one of South Africa’s premier higher education institutions, the University of Cape Town, goes through a second episode of leadership turmoil in less than five years following the messy exit of Mamokgethi Phakeng as vice-chancellor in 2023.

The future of Phakeng’s successor, Mosa Moshabela, is up in the air as he looks to fend off complaints by staff and students relating to his conduct and interactions within the university community.

Moshabela has since approached the courts for recourse relating to how the council is handling the complaints against him.

Moshabela was appointed UCT’s 11th vice-chancellor in August 2024. Norman Arendse, chair of the UCT council, said the process the council followed was undertaken on independent legal advice and was designed to ensure independence, appropriate confidentiality and fairness to all persons affected.

“The events of recent months involve difficult and sensitive issues. They concern individuals, but they also concern something larger: the ability of the university’s governance structures to discharge their responsibilities independently, fairly and without fear or favour,” Arendse said in communication to the university’s stakeholders.

“The council’s responsibility is neither to shield any individual office bearer from legitimate scrutiny nor to assume wrongdoing merely because an allegation has been made. Its responsibility is to act in the best interests of the university.”