University student leaders in South Africa were at the forefront of the struggle against apartheid, engaging in class boycotts, disrupting academic activities, and confronting the security cluster as part of the resistance movement. This historical context has shaped the current student leadership terrain in its form and structure. The result is that student protests are recognised as an effective and swift means of advocating for a legitimate cause. Student leaders, whether they truly do, regard negotiation as a form of powerlessness, and management bought leadership. Their lived-and-learned experiences of the historical and current South African protest actions had shaped the student leaders.
This paragraph argues that student leaders often perceive university management as slow and unresponsive, especially to the needs of low-income and disadvantaged students. As a result, students feel compelled to escalate disputes through protests and blockades, sometimes viewing these actions as a ‘technical knockout’ against management. The student body and management often view militant leaders as stronger than those employing quiet negotiations. Militancy becomes a means of political posturing and visibility, connecting student leaders to national political parties and potential political careers. Consequently, negotiation and solution-driven approaches are frequently neglected.
Protests and militancy take the centre stage because of the serious challenges of academic and financial exclusion; student hunger and lack of accommodation are deemed urgent and require solutions, not boardroom discussions. This is now about survival, not decency, because academic activities are continuing alongside the protesting and/or affected students.
Another major problem is the lack of training in conflict resolution, negotiation, university governance protocols, and policy understanding by student leaders.
In most cases, student leaders do not trust the university’s management. Management is perceived as suspicious and in bad faith, and students know that management responds quickly to problems when there is chaos or instability.
South African universities are afraid to punish students who engage in hooliganism and destructive behaviour. Sometimes, management punishes students who do not belong to their political organisations or camps. This ambiguity can normalise the escalation of student hooliganism and destructive behaviour. This makes student hooliganism a better option for students because it cowers management into the corners. It must be noted that not all student leaders are hooligans, violent, or confrontational; there are good, reasonable leaders out there. But they are “blacked out” by hooligans in most instances.
THE IMPACT OF DESTRUCTIVE STUDENT PROTESTS
It must be noted and understood that students’ quest for transformation is genuine, and most of their demands are very legitimate to the core. The cost of student leaflet-throwing hooliganism and violent protests delegitimises their demands. The University of Cape Town (UCT), the University of KwaZulu-Natal (UKZN), the University of Fort Hare (UFH), and the University of the Free State (UFS) have been characterised by the burning of buildings, disruptions to university operations, and violence during student protests in recent years. The student hooliganism and violent student protests mirror a picture of unfulfilled promise of free fee higher education, the leadership crisis, unresolved and endless problems related to transformation, decolonised education, lack of funding, pervasive student debt, academic and financial exclusion, massification of student admission without academic success or support systems to the students, and lack of quality student accommodation. The environment conducive to learning and teaching vanishes; it destroys universities’ brands and critical university infrastructure that defines a university.
THE FINANCIAL BURDEN: 2015-2017
An estimated R800 million had been accrued by the universities from 2015-2017, during the #FeesMustFall period (Department of Higher Education, 2018). The mostly affected universities are as follows: University of Johannesburg (±R144 million), University of KwaZulu-Natal (over R100 million), and Northwest University (±R198 million). The financial cost is higher if all the protests are covered since time immemorial.
In the 2025 academic year, the University of Fort Hare’s violent student protests, allegedly against the current Vice Chancellor’s contract extension, resulted in damage estimated at R250 million to R600 million (SABC, 9/10/2025). This is just one incident among many protests.
WAY FORWARD
The university must initiate awareness campaigns on its policies and establish an inclusive, structured consultation forum well before problems overwhelm everyone. Student leadership must know that mass recruitment of students to join peaceful protests is a more strategic move than destroying property. Student leaders can put pressure on university management through legal media campaigns and court actions as an alternative to violence to advance their demands. Student leaders must know that the destructive behaviour and hooliganism make the public unsympathetic to their demands. It makes their legitimate cries illegitimate.
By
Dr Sefoko Ramoshaba
0647092097
