Parole decisions show that our democracy functions

Here’s some good news for a change. Our institutions work.

When the Constitutional Court ruled that the man who killed struggle hero Chris Hani should be released on parole after 28 years in prison, it showed that the justice system works.

In the same week, the Supreme Court of Appeal ruled that Jacob Zuma ’ s early release from prison had been illegal and that he should be returned to orange overalls.

Once again this crucial institution of our democracy, the courts, works. It is, by the way, an interesting conundrum for politics.

Imagine a man who murdered an anti-apartheid leader being set free at about the same time as a man who fought in the struggle all his life is returned to prison.

This is how democracy works

— it is rule-bound, valuesbased, norm-driven and operates on the principle that nobody is above the law. Justice is, and should be, blind.

To be sure, many South Africans, black and white, would have liked to see Janusz Waluś rot in jail.

And yes, there is a significant number of Zuma followers who believe that their charismatic leader can do no wrong.

That’s why we have courts to make decisions based on the rule of law rather than the emotions of the masses. Without such a robust institution, this country would collapse.

Waluś will be paroled by court order within days, while the former president’s lawyers will continue to seek relief from the highest court. Regardless, our constitutional democracy stands firm.

There is another institution that surprised with its robustness of governance and that is the University of Cape Town.

To be honest, I had real fears that the constant onslaught on the rules of governance and the values of academia would take a serious knock at our leading research university.

After all, it was the council leadership itself that was alleged to have violated or sought to violate what management pundits call “governance 101”

— basic things like you cannot sit in or participate in decisions where you are the object of investigation.

For a moment it looked like UCT was going to collapse under a combination of rule-defying leadership and tribal politics — the latter means that I support you not on the basis of right or wrong but because you are from my particular “racial group”.

Then something remarkable happened. As council leaders resigned or left a crucial meeting to decide on who would lead the investigation of its leadership, the rest of the governance body found its spine and acted, for once, in the interest of the university rather than the interests of individuals.

That quorate meeting of council went on until 2am and a panel of independent judges was chosen to lead the investigation of council leadership.

Without sounding melodramatic, let me say that UCT as a higher education institution was probably saved from collapse that early morning.

Why was the UCT council leadership fighting this panel of independent judges so vociferously? Surely if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear?

All of this drama could have been avoided if the UCT council at the time took seriously an earlier report of the University Ombud who warned of serious leadership problems.

I sincerely hope that the new council does not again postpone stabilising decisions for the institution. Failure to do so will definitely keep this important university in a neverending spin of instability.

Some analysts have suggested to me that the threat to governance at UCT happened because corporate leaders occupied the leadership of council.

Not true. In Isaac Shongwe, Wits University has a corporate leader chairing its council, a man of impeccable character and deep integrity who understands what a university is (not a company) and what good governance means (respect the rules) for a public university.

That is why Wits is thriving while UCT operates under a cloud.

Finally, there is one more reason that UCT as an institution is likely to survive. It is held together by a very strong set of values that steer the middle management and administration of the institution.

Yes, those core values threatened from time to time as when a politics lecturer ate the ballots in a faculty board meeting because he did not like that a dean from elsewhere in Africa was likely to be chosen ahead of his preferred candidate.

If he were white, the balloteater would have been fired on the spot. Now, unsurprisingly, that same man has been ranting and raving inside the council to bring down the institution because he has still not learnt how to accept democratic norms.

So remember this, when UCT does well in international rankings it is not because of its leadership at the top of the organisation, it is about hardworking academics and administrators who are determined to abide by the academic values and rules of governance hardwired into the institutional culture over a century.

That is not only good for UCT, but for all our democratic institutions.