Sector-Wide Efforts to Combat Risks and Build Resilience

Universities South Africa (USAf), the representative body for the country's 26 public universities, has taken a proactive stance in addressing institutional capture, a pervasive threat to higher education governance. Institutional capture occurs when external interests or internal factions systematically undermine decision-making processes, often leading to corruption, instability, and a deviation from core academic missions. This phenomenon, characterized by political interference, tender manipulations, and attacks on leadership, has prompted USAf to host critical forums and webinars, uniting vice-chancellors, council members, and policymakers.

In March 2026, USAf organized a landmark webinar titled 'Institutional Governance: Confronting the Risks of Institutional Capture,' co-hosted with the Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET). Drawing over a hundred participants including registrars, risk officers, and executives, the event dissected the anatomy of capture, its drivers, and countermeasures. Speakers like Professor Jonathan Jansen, author of Corrupted and former University of the Free State rector, defined it as a 'systematic, deliberate process of undermining governance to shift authority and enable looting.' Professor Thandwa Mthembu, Vice-Chancellor of Durban University of Technology (DUT), highlighted 'intellectual capture,' where political agendas override academic deliberation.

Defining Institutional Capture in the South African Context

In South Africa's post-apartheid higher education landscape, institutional capture manifests through blurred lines between governance and management, excessive stakeholder pressures, and outright criminality. Universities, governed by the Higher Education Act of 1997, operate under cooperative governance involving councils, management, senate, and students. However, poverty, inequality, and unemployment—exacerbated by a 33% youth jobless rate—fuel expectations that universities resolve societal ills, inviting undue influence.

Capture risks include targeted violence against anti-corruption resisters, with staff deaths reported at some institutions. Structural enablers: student reps on tender committees, institutional forums overstepping advisory roles, and compromised councils. Jansen notes routinized violence and poor financial decisions as hallmarks, while Mthembu warns of 'hollowing out' universities' essence when forced into non-academic roles.

Recent Forum Insights: Drivers and Manifestations

The USAf forum revealed key drivers: misapplied transformation policies, like scrutinizing 7.7-12% foreign academics in South Africa versus 33% in the UK; unresolved grievances leading to control bids; and criminal tenders. At DUT, Mthembu cited a 2018 demand for tenders post-appointment support, a 32% unexplained security budget spike in March 2025, five senior suspensions since June 2025 for irregularities, and a 2024 council ouster attempt.

Professor Patrick Fitzgerald from Wits emphasized governance blunders: unpaid government appointees skipping 40-60% of meetings post-induction, unions as 'shadow executives,' and crony appointments. Global pressures—economic shifts, tech disruptions—compound local issues, eroding self-regulation amid audit overloads.

Case Studies: Fort Hare and DUT Under Scrutiny

University of Fort Hare exemplifies severe capture. Ongoing SIU probes into irregular appointments and corruption led to Vice-Chancellor Sakhela Buhlungu's April 2026 suspension. Linked to assassinations—council members and executives killed amid tender wars—the case underscores decades of patronage networks. Buhlungu called his anti-corruption push a 'noose,' highlighting resistance.

At DUT, Mthembu's leadership faced explicit tender demands and security scandals, prompting legal defenses. These cases illustrate broader patterns: procurement fraud, leadership sabotage, and politicized councils. USAf stresses such incidents are not systemic but demand vigilance, rejecting April 2026 Daily Investor claims of 'collapsing' universities as unsubstantiated.

Other mentions include Unisa procurement issues and Vaal University of Technology instability, but USAf highlights resilience: sustained research output, global partnerships, and top rankings.

Financial Strains Amplifying Governance Vulnerabilities

Public universities face ballooning enrolments—over 1 million students—without proportional state subsidies, now below 40% of budgets. Fee hikes spark protests, while NSFAS delays exacerbate tensions. Dr. Lourens van der Merwe, USAf Governance Manager, notes financial distress invites capture via desperate tenders.

Yet, USAf's April 2026 statement affirms stability: 'Challenges do not imply collapse.' Metrics like research publications (top globally per capita) and international collaborations counter doomsday narratives. For full details on USAf's rebuttal, see their official response.

Stakeholder Perspectives: From Government to Civil Society

DHET's Prof Thandi Lewin mapped pressures, urging balanced accountability. Students demand transformation but risk 'aggregative politics' overriding deliberation. Staff unions pursue pay equity, sometimes blurring lines. Councils, per Fitzgerald, need professional vetting—e.g., via Law Society or Accountants Institute.

Civil society, via OUTA, flags 'tsunami of corruption' like ghost learners. USAf advocates multi-stakeholder pacts, echoing its THENSA collaboration for sector good.

USAf's Proposed Reforms and Solutions

USAf's Leadership and Management Strategy Group drives reforms: smaller councils (7 members, no fees, vetted), ministerial appointment curbs, integrity chairs. Jansen pushes 'best interests' redress framing. Mthembu advises VCs: master statutes, build registrar alliances, document rigorously.

Practical steps: delegate procurement, enforce quorums with external majorities, professionalize appointments. DHET-USAf webinars foster shared vigilance. For deeper insights, explore the forum proceedings.

• Reduce council sizes and sitting fees to enhance focus.
• Vet members excluding corrupt backgrounds.
• Strengthen registrar-VC partnerships for procedural adherence.
• Limit stakeholder overreach in tenders and academics.

Impacts on Students, Faculty, and National Development

Capture disrupts academics: delayed exams, unstable leadership erode trust. Students face fee protests, housing woes; faculty battles predatory publishing, subsidy manipulations. Nationally, weakened innovation hampers Vision 2030 goals—graduates must be employable amid 42.6% underemployment.

Positive: USAf's R520m bursaries aid 5200 students; IBM AI partnerships boost capacity.

Global Comparisons and Lessons for South Africa

SA's 7.7-12% foreign faculty lags UK's 33%, risking talent drain. US pre-tenure 23% underscores diversity needs. Europe's Bologna Process balances autonomy-accountability; Australia's job-ready degrees offer employability models. USAf eyes 'future-ready' strategies: resilience amid strain.

Photo by Nils Huenerfuerst on Unsplash

Future Outlook: A Resilient Higher Education Sector

USAf envisions robust governance fortifying public universities as innovation engines. Ongoing forums, policy advocacy, and collaborations signal commitment. Challenges persist—financials, politics—but proactive recapture promises sustainability. Stakeholders must prioritize evidence-based reforms for equitable, world-class education.

For University World News coverage, visit their report on USAf's governance push.