DA demands Stellenbosch Uni leadership resign over fraud and conspiracy

The Stellenbosch University (SU) Council is set to meet on November 1 to discuss claims that a report recommending the closure of the Wilgenhof men’s residence was altered before being presented.

The Democratic Alliance (DA) has called for the suspension of Stellenbosch University’s Rector, Professor Wim de Villiers, and Council Chair, Dr. Nicky Newton-King, amid mounting allegations of deception leveled by the university’s Chancellor, Justice Edwin Cameron. According to Cameron, a former Constitutional Court Justice, De Villiers and Newton-King allegedly altered an independent report on misconduct at Wilgenhof, a men’s residence, misleading the university’s council into endorsing the residence’s closure.

The leaders of the university have a track record of using underhanded and dishonest methods to suppress conservative and Afrikaner elements in the university, such as the recent troubles over the disqualification of Afrikaner student representative candidates. The university also made headlines for banning the use of Afrikaans in private conversation on campus, and have long made it as difficult as possible for conservatives and Afrikaners to organise on campus by a variety of often-arbitrary bureaucratic obstacles.

In an affidavit submitted as part of ongoing litigation, Cameron claims that De Villiers and Newton-King conspired to remove key recommendations from the original report, which had advocated for a “campus dialogue” to address issues at Wilgenhof, and instead promoted closure as the only viable solution. This version, allegedly doctored on the instruction of the Rector and Council Chair, purportedly suppressed the report’s call for transformative dialogue, favoring a more extreme response and thus shaping council’s decision under false pretenses.

Cameron’s affidavit, reported by Rapport, asserts that the tampered document was knowingly presented to council without his knowledge. When confronted, De Villiers reportedly rebuffed Cameron’s request to acknowledge the changes publicly or to issue an apology for the misrepresentation. For a figure of Cameron’s standing, these allegations constitute not merely an administrative oversight but a serious breach of trust that could erode governance principles at the university.

The DA has positioned itself firmly against any attempt at obfuscation. Willie Aucamp, the DA’s national spokesperson, emphasized that any university leadership that skirts transparency not only undermines the institution’s credibility but also erodes the values of integrity and accountability vital to academic governance. Given the gravity of the accusations, the DA is urging Stellenbosch University’s council to suspend both De Villiers and Newton-King and to initiate an independent inquiry into Cameron’s allegations.

Failure to address these claims openly, the DA warns, risks deepening public distrust in the institution’s leadership—a situation that could have profound repercussions for the confidence of students, staff, and the broader community. For Stellenbosch, a failure to uphold transparency may imperil both its reputation and its role as a trusted institution of higher learning. The DA promises to keep a close watch, signaling that any wavering on accountability will prompt further political scrutiny.

‍