A recent students boycott at the University of Dar es Salaam (UDSM) had finally and in a way that astounded most students, parents and well-wishers ended in disgrace after the Government imposed harsh measures on demonstrating students.
The Government’s action has been interpreted by some critics as a way of suppressing the students’ grievances or dodging them so that they remain subservient to the authorities and silent where they should air their grievances.
“A responsible and accountable Government would first address the root causes of the problem rather than rush into silencing demonstrators,” commented one critic, adding: “UDSM students boycott and alleged violence are just the tip of the iceberg that has been accumulating for sometime. Indeed, UDSM students live and study in a distressing environment and the situation is worsening but no one in higher positions is bothering.”
Apparently, both the university administration and Government seem to wriggle out of the problem, which some sources say it has to do with cumulative and unresolved issues coupled with dirty politics, which is now deeply embedded in UDSM structures.
Similar remarks had been uttered hardly three weeks ago when a Dar es Salaam University Students Organisation (Daruso) presidential candidate, a Ugandan national, Odong Odwar, was apparently disqualified by the administration on grounds that he lacked some prerequisite credentials to join UDSM.
However, some of his colleagues (including some Daruso leaders) said what the administration did was just politicking since Odwar was the students’ choice but the administration wanted to put their own person they could easily control. “If the Vice Chancellor’s claims are genuine, how come a student is allowed to study at the university for more than a year now and only on the occasion of the presidential election is questioned about his credentials. Does it mean that they accepted him without going through his documents first? If that is the case then we lack competent university leadership,” said a Daruso leader during a local TV interview two weeks ago.
A UDSM lecturer, who preferred anonymity, said the real issue was overlooked by the administration to serve their interests. He said apart from the water crisis that had reportedly prompted the students boycott, he had heard that a certain famous political party, whose some of its followers are university administration and students, wanted to impose its own candidates to be chosen as Daruso leaders who had apparently been given some money for campaigning.
“Just ask yourself! Where can students who apply for loans, which is taxpayers’ money for their studies and university upkeep, get extra money to print expensive colour campaign posters if not being financed by certain rich people?” asked another lecturer, who also preferred anonymity.
“If what I heard is correct, then there was money that had been injected into the campaigns for certain candidates and some students did not want to see Daruso leaders being imposed on them by the administration,” said the former.
Apparently, the UDSM students boycott started with a water crisis both at UDSM Main Campus and Mabibo Hostel when students complained they had no running water at their residences for some days but no action was taken by the authorities. In fact, the problem has been there for years but around mid-February this year some students rioted and were later on discontinued over what was termed by the administration as “being involved in violence and drugs”. Seeing that there was no convincing ground, their colleagues pressed the administration to undo the decision or else they would demonstrate. From a small number, it grew to 39 and reached around 400 students.
UDSM Vice Chancellor Rwekaza Mukandala ordered the other Wednesday the students to call off the boycott by midday the following day and warned that this time suspension was unlikely; instead, a stiff action had to be sought as the former proved to be too lenient to bring about an effectual end.
Giving it more weight, the Minister for Education and Vocational Training, Prof Jumanne Maghembe, announced on that Wednesday evening in Dodoma that the protesting students and those who were involved in violence would be discontinued and they would not be allowed to rejoin any university programme in the country.
Prof Maghembe also ordered the Higher Education Loans Board to remove the students from the list of loan applicants.
Obviously, Prof Meghembe’s order was too harsh to be applied without consideration as Dr Wilbroard Slaa (Chadema opposition party Secretary General) had suggested. Dr Slaa’s advice was supported by a few other Members of Parliament who wanted more time to look at the issue thoroughly with a view to arriving at a more reasonable conclusion.
UDSM student boycotts are not new and hardly do the students’ demands ever been adequately addressed if not dodged. But dodging pressing issues is certainly characteristic of office-chair-leadership. It is disgraceful that most of our leaders always act too late to have any effectual impact whenever a crisis occurs. Of course, this is nothing else but simply politicking in the wrong place and time.
On the one hand, UDSM students think the responsible authorities do not want to listen to their genuine grievances and address them. They say the administration generalise that the students who have failed to pay university fees are the ones causing trouble at the university. They complain that the students’ poverty is now linked to trouble making. “This cannot be acceptable,” they say. On the other hand, the administration thinks some students are obdurate and such behaviour is unbecoming of university level students and future leaders.
What is common in the country though is that whenever boycotts occur, the riot police are called upon to contain them and often they use excessive force to disperse demonstrators. The media have, time and again, reported on the UDSM boycotts and shown how the riot police were beating them.
The UDSM problems can neither be solved by the riot police nor the Minister for Education and Vocational Training without listening to the students. But what is often done is a good way of suspending them. To solve the UDSM crisis involves meeting both the students and management and listening to each party impartially.
It can be done at university level where the two parties can reach a compromise but it can also involve a disinterested mediator. Thus, dialogue is more appropriate than just expelling and barring students from pursuing university studies in the country.
Actually, we cannot be fighting against poverty, diseases and ignorance and at the same time creating situations that harbour them. Likewise, we cannot also be promoting human rights (education is a right not a privilege) and at the same time be violating them.
In my opinion, the administration should not overlook the students’ grievances or suppress them. Each time an issue is raised it should be promptly and appropriately addressed. When demanding their rights, students also should always shun violence. Politicking at the university is disgraceful, as it will encourage students to seek political favours to the detriment of quality education.
Leave Your Comments