admin
Pamela Shumba, Senior Reporter
THE National University of Science and Technology (Nust) has refuted claims that the Minister of Higher and Tertiary Education, Science and Technology Development, Professor Jonathan Moyo, was frustrating the appointment of Dr Gatsha Mazithulela as Pro Vice Chancellor at the university.
The NewsDay recently reported that Prof Moyo thwarted the appointment of Dr Mazithulela, who is employed at Nust Technopark, a business development unit of the institution.
The publication also reported that Prof Moyo’s interference on Nust appointments was unlawful.
Nust director of communication and marketing Mr Felix Moyo yesterday said the process of selecting the university’s Pro-Vice Chancellor was being done in accordance with the Nust Act.
“The university wishes to put the record straight and enlighten the writer of the article, the newspaper’s editor, the newspaper’s readers and the general public. As Nust, we follow the Nust Act to the letter. The University was established by an Act of the Zimbabwe Parliament of 1990. The institution has a council as constituted in terms of Section 10 of the National University of Science and Technology Act 1990.
“Interviews were conducted and the chairman of the council wrote to the Ministry of Higher and Tertiary Education, Science and Technology Development as required by the Nust Act, but did not write to any applicant,” said Mr Moyo.
He said this was to initiate the long selection process which was, in this case, concluded in accordance with the Nust Act.
“The fact that no candidate was approved does not invalidate the process and certainly, does not remove the function and powers of “approval” from the Minister. Among its many functions, the university council is key in the process of appointing senior officers of the university, including the appointment of Pro-Vice-Chancellors.
“According to the Nust Act, and, for the purpose of considering appointments to the office of the Pro-Vice-Chancellor, the university forms a joint committee of the Council and Senate whose chairperson shall be the chairman of the Nust Council,” said Mr Moyo.
He added that the word “appointment” used in the article referred to the identification of a candidate selected and filtered through to the next level in the process of appointing a Pro-Vice-Chancellor.
“That is why, in the same breath and only three words further, the word “approval” is used… “with the approval of the Minister”. Any process that is subject to approval by a Higher Office can either be approved or not approved.
“Therefore, “appointment” in the text is more to give the concept of identification for further scrutiny on those candidates, or further scrutiny on that candidate, found worthy to go to the next level in the process of selection where the Minister, as the final authority, will exercise his prerogative of final approval or final veto,” said Mr Moyo.
He said according to the Schedule of Statutes (Sections 2 and 27) of the university, the joint Committee of Council and Senate shall “consider each applicant for appointment to a vacancy in the office of Pro-Vice-Chancellor and shall make recommendations thereon to the Council”.
“The council, after considering the joint committee’s recommendations, shall make the appointment concerned with the approval of the Minister.
“While we accept that our capacities to understand and interpret University Acts are different, we refuse to accept the defeatist conclusion that such shortcomings can be used as excuses for one to mislead self and go down the wrong and dark alley with multitudes of innocent readers,” said Mr Moyo.
He said it was mind boggling how security documents ended in the hands of the media.
“What is clear is that they were obtained in a clandestine and unofficial manner therefore, they were obtained illegally,” said Mr Moyo.
Online Reporter
derick.khumalo