At the outset, I need to say that I like Vice-Chancellor Prof Mamokgethi Phakeng and will always attend an event she invites me to. I dare say she will also go out of her way to attend an event of the UCT Association of Black Alumni (Uctaba), of which I am the deputy president.

She is a unique human being who does some interesting things that many a time either makes one smile, applaud her or raise one’s eyebrows a bit. Uctaba actively and publicly supported her candidature to succeed Dr Max Price as UCT vice-chancellor. And, by the way, we had an excellent relationship with him as well.

I will never forget the day when a colleague, Lungile Jacobs, and I sat in Prof Phakeng’s office and persuaded her to throw her hat into the ring when she was unsure whether to apply for the VC job.

She certainly did many good things at UCT and it is clear that she is in charge and there is/was a general sense that she is good for the institution. It is amazing to see the excellent rapport she has with students. She also goes out of her way to assist students in paying their fees, which is commendable. Her practical support for transforming UCT for the benefit of all cannot be questioned.

However, despite the above, the revelations in a recent Daily Maverick article — confirmed to me now and in the past by different sources — does not bode well. 

When we became aware that Prof Loretta Feris (who led transformation at UCT) was going to leave the institution, I personally interacted with her office in my capacity as deputy president of Uctaba, to express concern when it became apparent that she was to be temporarily replaced by a white male.

When there was a spat between her and the UCT ombudsman, we were concerned, but steered clear because we didn’t know all the facts. When Athol Williams, who blew the whistle on Bain’s part in State Capture, was made to resign from the UCT Graduate School of Business (GSB), I again reached out to her office to intervene and deal with Williams’ situation more compassionately. Unfortunately, she and her office did not want to get involved in what they deemed an “administrative process”.

When I became aware of executives leaving, many of them black, I was a bit concerned, but still stayed in my lane. I was astounded when I heard Prof Lis Lange was leaving, because she was the person the VC trusted to steady the ship at the troubled GSB. In hindsight, I should have shone the light a bit brighter on the goings-on over there.

I get it that it is tough being the VC of an institution like UCT, and one must be an exceptional leader and manager to make a success of it all. I am sure that as the VC, she constantly has to prove herself — that, unfortunately, comes with the territory and she can count on the support of many of us in that respect. However, one cannot successfully rule/manage through fear or threats. We all have weaknesses and we must acknowledge them and actively work in minimising them.

Many of those I spoke to are adamant that what is in that article is 100% correct. They all preferred to speak off the record and in confidence. Surely, this gives credence to the assertion of nondisclosure agreements having to be signed. It will be instructive if the reports of the investigations that were conducted can be released to the public so that we can apply our minds to the facts of the situation.

What I find strange is that many of the people she allegedly had run-ins with, were her appointments. They are black, were her go-to people to handle difficult situations on her behalf, and (dare I say it?) are women.

Who is the new ombud at UCT, and what is he/she doing about this saga — or is it all just a storm in a teacup?

The Senate and Council leadership need to step up and do what they are there for — provide proper leadership without fear or favour. I am looking for four things:

1. If the VC is squeaky clean and all of these people mentioned in the article — including the 37 who went to the university ombud at the time — are making things up and are driving a campaign against the VC, tell us. She then deserves an apology.
2. If the VC, in spite of her achievements, has glaring weaknesses around leadership, management or interpersonal skills, tell us. And let us know  what you are planning to do about it.
3. If these things are true and the VC is unable or unprepared to be rehabilitated, tell us and then do the uncomfortable thing — let her go.
4. If the chairperson of Council and the VC misled Council and the Senate, then they must unfortunately be dismissed.

I hope the VC, Senate and Council will not get into laagers when they debate, discuss and resolve this. Eish, the race card will probably rear its head again.

That institution is too important in society to be allowed to implode, and no individual must ever be allowed to become bigger than it. DM