Gender Based Violence within Institutions of Higher Learning

Gender Based Violence within Institutions of Higher Learning Higher Education and Training Committee 14 August 2018

Overview The CGE’s Constitutional Mandate Legal framework Transformation Hearings Purpose of the Hearings Institutions Process of the Hearings Overall findings Conclusion

Mandate of the CGE Section 187 of the Constitution and CGE Act No. 39 of 1996, as amended, require the CGE to promote respect for, and the protection, development and attainment of gender equality. The CGE vision is a society free from gender oppression and all forms of inequality. The CGE mandate is to monitor and evaluate legislation, policies and practices of the state, statutory bodies and private businesses, as well as indigenous and customary laws and practices; research and make recommendations to Parliament;

Mandate And to receive and investigate complaints of gender discrimination; and conduct public awareness and education on gender equality. CGE has powers to subpoena and to institute litigation.

Legal Framework Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Woman (CEDAW) Article 1 of CEDAW states that: “For the purposes of the present Convention, the term "discrimination against women" shall mean any distinction, exclusion or restriction made on the basis of sex which has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by women, irrespective of their marital status, on a basis of equality of men and women, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field.”

Legal Framework The Convention in Article 1 therefore provides a definition of discrimination against women. The definition of discrimination includes gender-based violence, that is, violence that is directed against a woman because she is a woman or that affects women disproportionately. It includes acts that inflict physical, mental or sexual harm or suffering, threats of such acts, coercion and other deprivations of liberty. Gender-based violence may breach specific provisions of the Convention, regardless of whether those provisions expressly mention violence.

Legal Framework Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) Article 2 of the UDHRC states that: “Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.”

Legal Framework Vienna Declaration 1993 and South African National Action Plan for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights. Article 8 highlights the importance of working towards the elimination of violence against women in public and private life, the elimination of all forms of sexual harassment, exploitation and trafficking in women, the elimination of gender bias in the administration of justice and the eradication of any conflicts which may arise between the rights of women and the harmful effects of certain traditional or customary practices, cultural prejudices and religious extremism.

Legal Framework The Beijing Platform for Action (BPA) The BPA requires governments, international communities and civil society, including non-governmental organizations and the private sector to take strategic action to address twelve critical areas of concern. These areas include but are not limited to violence against women; the burden of poverty on women; and inequality between men and women in the sharing of power and decision making at all levels.

Legal Framework Addendum to 1997 Declaration on Gender and Development by SADC Heads of State or Government The Addendum expresses concern at physical and sexual violence occurring in the family, including traditional practices harmful to women. It commits States to eradicate traditional norms and practices which legitimise and exacerbate the persistence and tolerance of violence against women and children.

Legal Framework South African Constitution,1996 The right to equality (Section 9) Section 9(1) states that everyone is equal before the law and has the right to equal protection and benefit of the law. Section 9(3) further states that the State may not unfairly discriminate directly or indirectly against anyone on one or more grounds, including race, gender, sex, pregnancy, marital status, ethnic or social origin, colour, sexual orientation, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, language and birth. The right to dignity (Section 10) Section 10 of the Constitution guarantees everyone a right to dignity.

Legal Framework Freedom of movement (Section 21) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement Freedom and security of the person (Section 12). Everyone has the right to freedom and security of the person which includes the right- To be free from all forms of violence from public or private sources

Transformation Hearings The CGE has conducted transformation hearings at institutions of higher learning since 2011. A total of 13 Universities have been called to appear before that Commission and account on compliance with the EEA and other gender related legislations. The universities were requested to complete a questionnaire which was analysed and interrogated by the Commission. Both qualitative and quantitative research methodologies were applied during the assessment of information.

Continuation… The CGE is concerned with the lack of a proper understanding of gender dynamics in the workplace accompanied by a slow pace of transformation. The aforementioned is symptomic of the low level of compliance with relevant labour legislation aimed at transformation more especially, the Employment Equity Act (EEA), Basic Condition of Employment Act (BCEA), Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act (PEPUDA) and also applicable common law developments.

Continuation… The CGE’s decision to place special focus on institutions of higher learning was precipitated by disturbing media reports, as well as complaints reported to the Commission by both employees in the sector and students. These included: Media reports of “sex-for-marks” scandals. Allegations of sexual harassment at institutions of higher learning. Slow transformation around lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTIQ) issues. The placement of women and persons with disabilities (PWDs) in senior management, as well as the adoption of gender policies.

Purpose of the Hearings The primary objectives of the hearings were to assess the impact of the employment equity legislation and to hold institutions of higher learning accountable for non-compliance. To probe current internal policies, systems, programmes and relevant strategies put in place by the selected institutions to ensure effective gender transformation, including the challenges faced in achieving the transformation goals. Furthermore the hearings are used as a platform to bring to light the discrimination and risks experienced by women, people with disabilities and LGBTI persons across various sectors; and levels in the workplace as well as students.

Institutions that appeared before CGE The following institutions appeared before the Commission: University of Cape Town Stellenbosch University University of the Free State University of South Africa University of Johannesburg University of Venda University of KwaZulu-Natal University of the Witwatersrand University of Limpopo Tshwane University of Pretoria North West University DHET University of Pretoria Rhodes University

Continuation The following institutions are to appear before the Commission during October 2018: University of Mpumalanga University of Zululand Sol Plaatje University Nelson Mandela University

Process of the Hearing Universities are served with a questionnaire which they complete and send the information requested to the CGE. Information is then analyzed. A hearing is then convened at a later stage. The University is then given a chance to appear before the Commission and do oral presentation. After the presentation questions are asked and recommendations made to institutions. The CGE then follow up on the implementation of the recommendations through consultative meetings to track progress and identify challenges that impedes the implementation.

Overall findings Sexual harassment is prevalent at institutions of higher learning. Sexual harassment predominately comes in a form of sex-for-marks. Sexual harassment policies are not communicated with Students and general staff members. Policies are largely placed on the intranet. The Commission found that during orientation of first year learners, most universities do not induct first year learners on sexual harassment policies. Similarly during induction of new staff members minimal time is invested of sexual harassment policies. It was found that generally sexual harassment policies were largely focused on employees to the exclusion of learners.

Continuation… It was found that the uncertainty around sexual harassment policy framework at universities has contributed to students and staff members not reporting such matters at the University out of fear of victimization. In some instances students report sexual harassment after a long period. Not all Universities provide counselling services of victims of sexual harassment. The Students often rely on the Department of Social Development for this services.

Continuation… It was found that some Universities have introduced helpline for people to report incidences of discrimination and violence against LGBTIQ persons as anonymous; whilst other universities have no measures put in place to eradicate gender based violence among students, staff and suppliers. It was noted by the Commission that consumption of alcohol and drugs by students contribute to a high number of sexual violence incidences

Continuation… The Commission noted that institutions of higher learning are failing to create environment of zero tolerance to gender based violence, to assess gender based violence threat within campuses, and to support victims or respond timeously and appropriately. The Universities have no specific policies that deals with safety of students and the processes that must be followed. Students who reside outside university residences are more susceptible to gender based violence. Universities often neglect to put safety measures outside campus.

Interventions by the Commission The Commission has compelled Universities to conduct sexual harassment campaigns during orientation. The Commission has additionally delivered sexual harassment lectures to various universities. ( students and staff members were targeted) The Commission has recommended that sexual harassment and grievance policies be shared with students Representatives Councils. SRC and Management needs to create a safe reporting space for students. The CGE has attended induction processes at various Universities to ensure that sexual harassment and grievance policies are adequately outline to staff members.

Interventions by the Commission It was recommended that refresher sessions on sexual harassment and grievance polices be conducted with staff members and students. Sexual harassment policies needed to be regularly reviewed and updated. The CGE has assisted universities to review gender related policies. The Commission recommend that universities must build strong relationships with the SAPS to address gender based violence within and outside campus areas. Against these recommendations , some universities have invested in building more university residence to minimize the number of the students who reside outside the campus.

Interventions by the Commission Some universities have introduced CCTV footages on campus as part of their safety mechanisms. Sexual harassment polices have been extended to protect even independent contractors who enter campus. Whistle blower lines have been established in some universities to report gender based violence.

Rhodes The issue of sexual violence at Rhodes University is not a recent one. In an academic study published in 2007, titled “The Habitus of the Dominant: Addressing Rape and Sexual Assault at Rhodes University”, it was noted sexual violence as a distinct and an incurring problem. Within the study, reference is made to a 1991 SRC report, which claimed that over half the student population found campus unsafe at night, and 12% did not walk alone after dark. CGE took cognizance of students calls to eradicate the scourge of rape at the institution during 2016 student protests culminating into a multi pronged investigation.

Rhodes High delegation meetings with the Student Representative Council, South African Police Services, the Office of the Vice Chancellor and upper echelons of staff, the RU reference group and Task Team Committee. Onsite surprise inspection of campus and the harassment office, including random questioning of students as to their knowledge of sexual offences and the options available to report. RU was included in the sampling for the Commissions holistic, systemic investigation into gender transformation at institutions of higher learning, wherein the Vice Chancellor appeared twice before the Commission to account.

Rhodes The Commission continues to monitor reported sexual offences at the University and is provided all outcomes of disciplinary sittings and/or court appeals etc. Rhodes has reviewed its policies surrounding sexual offences, including the restructuring of the harassment office, the manner in which they prosecute such cases (disciplinary hearings) and installation of CCTV camera’s. Moreover, there has been increased education campaigns, establishment of a 24 hour counselling support system and firm dedication to the struggle by the office of the Vice Chancellor.

Rhodes The Commission is deeply sadden by the tragic loss of student Khensani Maseko and reaffirms its finding that there is great disconnection between policy and the implementation thereof. The culture and threat of gross gender based violence is present in every step of a women's path through life. Despite the initiatives taken by Rhodes, Ms Maseko bore the pain of the rape and the associated horrors for an anguishing two months before reporting it to Rhodes on the 30th of July 2018. The Commission is investigating the actions taken by Rhodes to date after the report, including the possible inquest into Ms Maseko’s death. The poignant statement of Ms Maseko “No one deserves to be raped” needs to be a call of uprising to South Africa as a whole , a country which is plaqued by the rampant culture of rape and gender based violence.

Conclusion It should be noted that the hearings of transformation within the institutions of higher learning are still ongoing with four (4) Universities expected to appear before the Commission around October 2018. The Commission will continue to recommend to universities to sensitise their communities on sexual harassment and other gender based violence related policies. The Commission will ensure that it monitor implementation of recommendations to all universities that appeared before it . The scope of the investigation will be extended in future to include Tertiary and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) Colleges.

Thank You HAVE A GENDER RELATED COMPLAINT ???? REPORT IT TO 0800 007 709 TwitterHandle @CGEinfoFacebook: Gender Commission of South Africa

Gender Based Violence within Institutions of Higher Learning