Letter reflects poorly on author's academic acumen

THE article by Professor Pholoho Morojele in the Sunday Tribune of November 9 titled “Why I was fired for upholding governance integrity at the University of KwaZulu-Natal,” is intriguing, first by its substance, and secondly by its purpose and timing.

In the article, Morojele states:” I served as the Dean of Research at the University of KwaZulu-Natal. My role required me to uphold institutional policy, ensure compliance with higher education regulations, and protect the university from governance breaches. I refused to participate in processes that violated university policy, the Higher Education Act, and basic principles of due process.”

The statement, and consequently the entire article, raises two main issues. The first relates to substance, which raises the problem of motive for penning the article in the first place, and the second to its timing and factual accuracy.

First, the substance. If this were a political statement rather than a statement by a dean of research, it would be forgivable. Every senior employee of a university would, in the course of their duty, be required to uphold all the above. What Morojele omits, and this is substantively crucial, are the exact circumstances when these breaches or violations were committed. We are presented with abstractions, “compliance, good governance, institutional policy, etc.,” and a refusal to “participate in the processes that violated university policy,” all constituting an amoeba that lacks both anatomy and physiology.

And this is purposeful, to mislead and confuse the general public who, in the absence of factual evidence, are expected to swallow the clichés holus bolus. Any intelligent person, let alone academic professionals, would know that in serious, let alone controversial discourses, only evidence-based statements are acceptable. Generic, unsupported platitudes reflect more on the presenter than on the presentation itself.

The second issue concerns the accuracy of the pronouncements. Having not mentioned the substance of the issues in the first place, Morojele seeks refuge in the article from the Sunday Tribune of the 26th of October 2025, where it was stated “The Parliament’s Portfolio Committee on Higher Education has revealed shocking governance failures at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, where a private security company allegedly ‘captured’ the university’s Risk Management Services.”

Reviewing the proceedings from the meeting between the University and the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Higher Education, one issue stands out, specifically the University’s contracting of Ungoti Security Company to assist with the accreditation of a student residence.

The Sunday Tribune, according to the Chairperson of the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Higher Education, Mr Letsie, had misrepresented the discussions. In a statement published on Parliament’s website titled “No Shocking Governance Failures at University of KwaZulu-Natal (UKZN), Higher Education Chairperson Responds to Sunday Tribune”, Mr Letsie maintained that the article by the Sunday Tribune contains several factual inaccuracies about the committee’s recent oversight visit to the University of KwaZulu-Natal (UKZN).

And continues, “What we actually said was that, in terms of specific governance matters, the committee expressed concern about the council’s decision to approve a deviation from normal procurement processes in the awarding of a contract to Ungoti Security Company. This company was originally appointed to assist the university with student residence accreditation, even though the university confirmed that Ungoti had no prior experience in that area.”

The article concludes “Mr Letsie wishes to clarify that during the oversight visit, the committee observed that the University Council was fully functional and properly constituted, and that relations between the council, management and stakeholders were cordial and constructive.”

Opportunistically, Morojele continues, “The Parliamentary Portfolio Committee is now scrutinising the very issues I raised. Today, the very issues I tried to prevent from within are under scrutiny by the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Higher Education.”

Factually, what would bring a College Dean of Research to the University’s contractual issues dealing with the procurement of risk management services?  Should we infer that the amoeba style was intended to mask the presentation in convenient populist language to appeal for political support?  If that were the motive, it reflected poorly on the author's academic acumen.  

Paulus Zulu: Emeritus Professor: UKZN

SUNDAY TRIBUNE