The phenomenon that lets the president control universities

Zimbabwe’s public universities are governed by a rubric of laws and colonial traditions that form a conducive political environment for what can best be called the University Administration State President Complex (UASPC), a phenomenon characterised by relations between the president’s office and a state university’s administration.

This means the president’s office controls state universities’ administrations in a way that is detrimental to academic freedom and institutional autonomy.

Origins of the University Administration State President Complex

When the University College of Rhodesia and Nyasaland (now the University of Zimbabwe) was formed in the 1950s, Elizabeth II, queen of the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth – who was Rhodesia’s head of state – was declared the institution’s chancellor.

Following Zimbabwe’s independence in 1980, the country’s president replaced the queen as Zimbabwe’s head of state and became chancellor of the only university in the country, the University of Zimbabwe.

This was in line with a tradition inherited from the colonial government whereby the head of state also became the chancellor of all public universities.

While Queen Elizabeth had played a purely ceremonial role as chancellor, Zimbabwe’s president was given a more prominent, executive role.

This marked the beginning of the UASPC. However, the UASPC existed only on paper and was largely dormant between 1982 and 1987 because the role of president was ceremonial.

From 1980 to 1987, Zimbabwe’s president was Canaan Banana, a figurehead without the political currency to truly exercise any of the powers afforded to him as chancellor. The real power lay with Robert Mugabe who, as prime minister, was head of government.

Robert Mugabe and the activation of the UASPC

Robert Mugabe dissolved the role of prime minister in 1987 and transferred the powers of that position to the office of the president. This set the stage for the activation of the UASPC. The presidency was no longer ceremonial but imperial in nature. Whoever sat in that office would now become both head of state and government.

Mugabe took over from Banana and became president. However, unlike Banana, who did not wield any real power in government, Mugabe – who had become both head of state and government – had the political wherewithal to exercise powers afforded to him as university chancellor.

With stiff opposition starting to build against him in the late 1980s, a lot of it coming from the university, Mugabe had both the powers required to control the university and the motive to do so.

It was thus under Mugabe’s rule that the UASPC ceased being a paper tiger and became a political reality, not only for the University of Zimbabwe but for every state university formed in the post-independence era.

In 1992, the UASPC became so pronounced that, for the first time since independence, the vice-chancellor of a major public university, namely Walter Kamba from the University of Zimbabwe, resigned in a famous speech on graduation day, citing political interference.

UASPC in practice: How does it work?

The president’s office controls the administrations of public universities. To be more specific, the president’s office heavily influences key decision-making offices and bodies at public universities, namely, the chancellor’s office, office of the vice-chancellor, council and senate. The chancellor’s office, the highest office at a public university, is – as already alluded to – held by the president.

According to the University of Zimbabwe Act (most public universities are run by legislation modelled along the lines of this law), the chancellor can, among other things, make key appointments, sit on the council as an ex-officio member, preside over any meeting held by the university and confer and withdraw degrees.

In a report published in 2012, SAIH, a Norwegian organisation working with student organisations in Zimbabwe, noted that there are no checks and balances to ensure that key appointments by the chancellor are not made on a partisan basis.

The president can and has been accused of appointing loyalists who, in turn, defend the president’s interests at the university. For instance, the vice-chancellor, one of the president’s top appointees, has the power to suspend members of staff and students.

Reports compiled by the Students Solidarity Trust indicate that suspension and expulsion, especially of student activists, are carried out to protect the interests of a sitting president who is often a target of student leaders speaking out against corruption, dictatorship and bad governance.

This creates a culture of fear that is detrimental to academic freedom as both students and staff are afraid to criticise the head of state within tertiary institutions, even as part of their studies, because they fear being victimised.

Altogether, 65% of the university council, which is the executive and governing authority of a state university, is appointed by the minister of higher education, according to the late prominent scholar and historian of Zimbabwe, Terence Ranger.

The minister of higher education is appointed by, and serves at the pleasure of, the president. In essence, this means that the minister has the power to shape composition of the council so that it is sympathetic towards the president.

The senate falls under, and is subject to, decisions of the council. This automatically means it is also subject to outside influence through the council which controls it.

The complex and international standards: Is it the norm?

The UASPC is not preponderant and is more likely to be found in authoritarian countries. In a democratic country, a public university chancellor is often an honorary head with limited powers and the role is normally assumed by established individuals as opposed to sitting heads of state.

This is the case at most South African public universities where the role is obtained through election. Election is also the procedure used to select vice-chancellors or university executive heads in many other countries.

None of the key decision-making bodies of public universities are controlled by the head of state or head of government in countries with progressive education models. Selection of people to such bodies is often left to the universities, themselves, or the responsibility is shared with public entities.

The process is not heavily controlled by direct appointees of a sitting president as is the case in Zimbabwe where the minister of higher education appoints 65% of council members.

While it would be progressive for Zimbabwe to amend legislation that governs public universities so that it is in line with international standards, it appears the country is going in the opposite direction.

The government is currently pushing amendments that require the minister of higher education to approve the appointment of bursars in public universities. This extends the power of the president, through his appointees, to control the university, which is detrimental to institutional autonomy, a concept that works best with minimal interference from outside forces.

The UASPC is linked to the authoritarian model of governance in Zimbabwe. As such, it will most likely remain in place until the way Zimbabwe is governed changes.

Zachariah Mushawatu is a freelance journalist. He recently completed a masters thesis on academic freedom at the University of Bergen, Norway, and is also the former national spokesperson of the Zimbabwe National Students Union, or ZINASU.