Top South African university under fire for alleged racial discrimination

Political parties have come out in arms to criticise Stellenbosch University for a recent internship advertisement that excluded white applicants.  

The Democratic Alliance (DA) and the Freedom Front Plus (FF+) both condemned the university for the “discriminatory race quotas” that “dehumanise everyone.”

The advertisement for the internship, seen by FF+, was for a position within the Department of Agronomy, in the faculty of AgriSciences, for two junior research assistants. 

It stated that “only black, coloured, Indian, or Chinese South African citizens with a South African identity document will be considered,” according to FF+.

“The advertisement amounts to direct discrimination, omitting the usual phrasing ‘preference will be given to previously disadvantaged candidates’ – or something similar,” said the FF+’s Wynand Boschoff. 

He added that the advert made it seem as if the positions would remain vacant if the department did not receive applications from black, coloured, Indian or Chinese applicants. 

The DA’s National Spokesperson, Jan de Villiers, said the university “racially-engineered who could and who could not take up the internship.”

De Villiers added that no pubic institutions should be allowed to treat South Africans as demographic categories instead of individuals with unique talents and ambitions. 

“This is a very dangerous strategy, which can only divide South Africans and pit races against one another,” he said. 

Stellenbosch University’s media manager, Martin Viljoen, told Newsday that the advertisement has been redacted and will be reissued.

“The advertised internship forms part of a government programme aimed at broadening participation from designated groups in the agricultural sciences,” he said. 

The external funder for the internships indicated a preference for candidates from designated racial groups. 

However, the university acknowledged that its internal processes require that these preferences be stated in a manner that is consistent with South African law and university policy. “This was not done in this case,” Viljoen said. 

Racial quotas ‘dehumanising’ and ‘discriminatory’

The Employment Equity Act states that “no person may unfairly discriminate, directly or indirectly, against an employee, in any employment policy or practice.” 

The act goes on to say this includes discrimination on the basis of race, gender, disability, religion, age, culture, or HIV status. 

It is not, however, unfair discrimination, according to the act, to take affirmative action measures consistent with the purpose of employment equity. 

Therefore, it is compliant with the law for the university to advertise the internship with preferences listed for previously disadvantaged groups.

The advertisement was technically not compliant, however, because it contained explicit discrimination against a whole racial group. 

The reissue of the advertisement will likely change the wording to reflect affirmative action rather than discrimination, according to the DA.

“Stellenbosch University does not support unfair discrimination of any kind. All recruitment and internship opportunities must comply with the Employment Equity Act, the Constitution and SU’s own equity commitments.”

He added that the university values the contributions of all its staff and students and is committed to fostering an inclusive environment where opportunities are broadened and every prospective applicant is treated fairly.

The DA, upon hearing the explanation, said that “universities should not bend on principles to the whims of those with money.”

“Whether the target is to give opportunity to white, black, Indian, or coloured citizens, the principle is the same: no one should be reduced to a quota, and no opportunity should be denied to someone based solely on their race,” de Villiers added.