The Stellenbosch University (SU) Council is scheduled to convene on Friday, following allegations that the final report provided by the panel that reviewed the infamous Wilgenhof men’s house was ‘altered’ before it reached the council’s desk, Cape {town} Etc reports.
Also read: Stellenbosch University to close controversial Wilgenhof residence
The allegations were made by chancellor and former Constitutional Court Justice Edwin Cameron.
The council received a study that suggested ‘the permanent closure of Wilgenhof,’ and the university has since declared that the house will be closed next year ‘in its current shape and replaced by a redesigned and regenerated male residence.’
According to Cameron’s affidavit, Professor Wim de Villiers, the university vice-chancellor, and Dr Nicky Newton-King, the council chairperson, allegedly altered the study that recommended Wilgenhof’s closure.
Cameron stated in his affidavit that the report offered the option of keeping the residence open while conversation with residents and the larger community was ongoing. According to Cameron, this part was changed in the publicly released final report.
Cameron, as chancellor, had access to the panel’s report on the topic. De Villiers sent it to him. Cameron was the former Wilgenhof primarius, or leader of the resident committee.
The Wilgenhof Alumni Association has filed petitions in the high court seeking to overturn the university’s decision to close the home.
In a statement released on Sunday, he described the situation as ‘deeply regrettable’ in view of its recent settlement with the Association for the Advancement of Wilgenhof Residents (AWIR), which had launched a legal challenge to the residence’s looming closure.
‘With reference to recent developments, media reports and allegations around the Wilgenhof matter, Stellenbosch University will convene an extraordinary meeting of Council on Friday, 1 November 2024 to consider the matter,’ said the university.
‘The settlement with the AWIR should be regarded as a positive step in finding resolution and commitment in breaking with unacceptable practices at Wilgenhof and the university’s transformation journey of SU and its residences,’ said the university, adding that AWIR’s court action could have prevented the implementation of the decision of council.
‘In such event, the residence may have thus remained open, the facilitation process towards a reimagined, rejuvenated and renewed student community, and the upgrades to the bathrooms, would have all been stalled until such time as the review of the decision had been completed. This process could have taken several years as we know, given timelines of procedure, the availability of hearing dates and the various appeal processes to the disposal of the parties to pursue up to the Constitutional Court.’
‘With the settlement, the council agreed to accommodate Wilgenhof residents by shortening the period of closure to one semester and by allowing those students who wish to do so, to stay in the larger of the two new north campus residences,’ said the university, emphasising that the settlement didn’t compromise on the crux of the recommendation.
Also read:
Body of Stellenbosch University student recovered from Welgevallen Dam
Picture: @itsTyronePrins / X
