I have written on Fort Hare on several occasions because I believe its challenges represent more than an individual institutional difficulty. They raise broader questions about governance, accountability and the ability of our public institutions to correct themselves when they experience serious challenges. This article seeks to move the discussion beyond personalities and immediate disputes. It applies an approach often associated with President Thabo Mbeki’s public policy thinking: before prescribing solutions, there must first be a deeper understanding of the nature of the problem, its historical causes and the conditions that allow challenges to persist. The purpose of this contribution is not to prejudge ongoing processes, investigations or individuals. It is to encourage a serious national conversation about strengthening the governance architecture of South Africa’s public universities.
By Zola Phila :
Introduction: When an institutional challenge becomes a national question
The University of Fort Hare occupies a unique place in South Africa’s intellectual and democratic history. It is not simply an institution of higher learning; it is part of the national story of knowledge production, leadership development and democratic transformation.
For this reason, developments at Fort Hare deserve careful examination. The university’s immediate governance challenges must be addressed through proper institutional processes, respect for due process and a commitment to restoring stability.
However, Fort Hare also presents South Africa with a wider question.
Are we dealing with one university’s governance difficulty, or are we witnessing a recurring challenge in how complex public institutions are governed?
This distinction matters because a constitutional democracy cannot only respond when institutions reach crisis point.
It must also examine whether its governance systems are strong enough to identify weaknesses early, correct failures and protect institutions before confidence is damaged.
The importance of diagnosis before intervention
One of the enduring lessons from President Thabo Mbeki’s approach to public policy is the importance of diagnosis before prescription. Complex problems cannot be solved through immediate reaction alone. They require a careful understanding of their origins, their institutional environment and the factors that allow them to continue.
This principle is particularly important when considering university governance.
A university is not merely an administrative organisation. It is a complex public institution where academic freedom, leadership, financial management, legislation, governance structures and societal expectations intersect.
When such an institution experiences instability, the responsible question is not only who should be held accountable for a particular event.
The deeper question is: What conditions allowed the difficulty to emerge, and what institutional reforms are required to prevent repetition?
A democracy that diagnoses carefully is more likely to produce lasting solutions.
Fort Hare and the wider governance environment
The danger is that each university crisis is treated as an isolated event. Yet South Africa’s higher education sector has experienced a number of governance challenges involving councils, executive management, staff, students and government oversight structures.
Each institution has its own circumstances and must be assessed on its own facts. However, the repeated emergence of governance tensions suggests that South Africa must examine whether its higher education governance framework is sufficiently equipped for the complexity of modern universities.
The issue is not simply leadership failure. It is also about institutional design.
Are councils equipped for the responsibilities placed upon them?
Are governance roles clearly understood?
Are intervention mechanisms effective before instability becomes entrenched?
These are questions that deserve serious attention.
Learning from other institutions
The experience of other universities demonstrates that governance challenges can take different forms. Some institutions face disagreements about strategic direction, institutional culture or leadership relationships. Others confront questions relating to financial sustainability, compliance or public confidence.
The University of Cape Town, for example, demonstrates the importance of distinguishing between institutional accountability and institutional collapse. Mature institutions must be able to engage difficult questions openly through appropriate governance and oversight processes.
Accountability mechanisms should not only appear when institutions fail.
They should be part of normal democratic governance.
A strong institution is not one that avoids scrutiny.
A strong institution is one that can withstand scrutiny and improve as a result.
The constitutional balance between autonomy and accountability
Universities require autonomy. Academic freedom depends on protecting institutions from inappropriate interference.
However, autonomy exists alongside accountability.
Public universities are supported by society.
They educate citizens, produce research, develop skills, and contribute to national development.
The challenge is therefore achieving the correct constitutional balance.
Councils must provide effective oversight without becoming involved in daily administration.
Executive leadership must exercise authority while remaining accountable.
Government must protect the public interest while respecting institutional independence.
The failure to maintain this balance creates instability.
The need for extraordinary oversight in extraordinary circumstances
Where a public institution experiences prolonged governance difficulty, society is entitled to ask whether ordinary mechanisms are sufficient.
This is not an argument against university autonomy.
It is an argument for ensuring that public confidence is protected.
Fort Hare requires a process that convinces students, staff, alumni and society that institutional renewal is credible.
Where investigations take place, their findings must be handled transparently and responsibly.
Accountability is not achieved only through producing reports.
It is achieved when institutions demonstrate the willingness and capacity to act on lessons identified.
Parliament, oversight and public confidence
In a constitutional democracy, oversight is not interference. It is one of the foundations of accountability.
Parliament has a responsibility to ensure that public institutions operate within frameworks that promote transparency, effectiveness and public confidence.
The question is not whether oversight should exist.
The question is whether oversight mechanisms are strong enough to protect institutions when challenges become serious.
South Africa’s democratic experience has demonstrated that institutional accountability cannot depend only on internal processes.
Public confidence requires visible commitment to correction and reform.
Beyond individuals: strengthening institutions
The temptation during institutional crises is to focus only on personalities.
But strong democracies build systems that are greater than individuals.
The central question is not only who occupies positions of authority today.
The question is whether the systems surrounding those positions are capable of producing responsible governance.
Fort Hare therefore provides an opportunity for national reflection.
The objective should not simply be to resolve the immediate dispute.
It should be to strengthen the institution for future generations.
Conclusion: A test of institutional maturity
Fort Hare may be the immediate focus of public attention, but the lesson extends beyond one university.
The real measure of a democracy is not whether its institutions ever experience difficulty.
Institutions are created by human beings and therefore will always face challenges.
The measure of a mature democracy is whether it has the honesty, courage and institutional capacity to confront problems openly and correct them effectively.
South Africa owes its universities nothing less.
Before prescribing another solution, we must first ensure that we have correctly understood the problem.
About the author
Zola Pinda is a South African writer and governance commentator focusing on public institutions, higher education, accountability and constitutional democracy. His perspective is informed by his journalism background at Rhodes University, his engagement with student leadership traditions and his academic training in Professional and Business Communication. His writing examines the relationship between leadership, institutions, accountability and South Africa’s democratic development, with a particular interest in strengthening public institutions and improving governance outcomes. – @NewsSA_Online
Follow us on our social media platforms below: