Cape Town - The legal team representing expelled Stellenbosch University student Theuns du Toit says it is preparing to appeal the institution’s decision, charging the conclusions made were based on “unproven facts”.
Du Toit was expelled after an independent Central Disciplinary Committee (CDC) found him guilty, after he was captured on video urinating on fellow black student Babalo Ndwayana’s belongings.
The panel found that while it could not conclude that du Toit's use of the word "boy" was racist, it found him guilty of acting in a racist manner in saying, to the effect, that “it’s a white boy thing”.
“A student shall not act in a manner that is racist, unfairly discriminatory, violent, grossly insulting, abusive or intimidating against any other person. This prohibition extends but is not limited to conduct which causes either mental or physical harm, is intended to cause humiliation, or which assails the dignity of any other person,” the panel said.
Du Toit was also found guilty of contravening amended residence rules.
“These findings led the CDC to conclude that there is no alternative but to expel Mr du Toit with immediate effect from the university. Once Mr du Toit has received the reasons for the CDC’s decision, he has five workdays to file a notice of appeal, against the CDC’s finding and/or sanction,” the panel stated.
Du Toit’s legal representative William Fullard said they believed the judgment was“ bad in law”.
“It is our view that the judgment is bad in law as conclusions were made based on unproven facts. The committee erred in further aspects as well, which will be fully canvassed during the appeal. In terms of the Disciplinary Code of the university we have five days to note the appeal. There are numerous other aspects, for example the inconsistencies on Mr Ndwayana’s two statements and media interviews,” he said.
But Ndwayana's attorney, Nomonde Gxilishe said they maintained the view that the CDC “correctly arrived at the finding of guilt of du Toit”.
“The view by Theuns' lawyer that the judgment is bad in law is baseless. At the onset, it needs to be noted that we are not in a court of law, therefore the decision of the CDC is not a judgment but rather a decision. The CDC has provided clear reasons on how they arrived at their decision. Having looked at the report/decision we are of the view that the reasons align with the Disciplinary Code of the university and are based on the facts of the matter.”
“Although we were not part of the disciplinary hearing, we are well aware of the facts and can confirm that the facts support the outcome that the CDC arrived at. The evidence submitted to the committee by Mr Ndwayana prior to the hearing clearly set out the events of the revolting acts by Theuns so we are perplexed by the comment made by his legal representative. It is not sufficient for them to merely say that there were errors and inconsistencies, without submitting facts substantiating that view,” said Gxilishe.
Ndwayana’s family said they were “ecstatic” with the outcome.
Cape Times