- Court grants urgent interdict against former registrar, restricting alleged harmful actions.
- Case heard without Mothata present after he did not show up despite notice.
- Unisa states the ruling protects institutional integrity and demonstrates a strong stance on reputational harm.
The University of South Africa (Unisa) has obtained an urgent court order against its former registrar.
The High Court in Pretoria accepted that Professor Steward Mothata’s alleged behaviour posed a serious and growing threat to the university’s leadership, governance, and reputation.
The interdict, granted on 17 March 2026, followed Unisa’s description of Mothata’s actions as a prolonged and intentional campaign. The university stated it had no choice but to take action.
Unisa moved quickly to court, arguing that Mothata’s actions and communications were seriously harming the university’s reputation and internal operations.
According to Unisa, this behaviour exceeded legitimate criticism, rising to harassment and a sustained attempt to undermine its governance structures.
Matter heard without Mothata present
The case proceeded without Mothata after the court confirmed that he had been properly notified of the proceedings but chose not to appear.
The court, satisfied that all notification requirements had been met, allowed the case to continue and considered Unisa’s arguments and evidence without any opposing submissions.
After reviewing the application, the court granted the interdict in favor of Unisa. The order is meant to stop any further actions that could harm the institution, while protecting its leadership, governance structures, and reputation.
University response to ruling
Unisa welcomed the ruling, calling it a necessary and fair legal step to protect the institution from ongoing reputational damage.
The university said it noted that the outcome shows how seriously the courts take conduct threatening institutional stability and governance.
In the statement, Unisa made it clear that it will not hesitate to take legal action against anyone it believes is harming its operations or public standing. In its view, the interdict supports its concerns and emphasises the need to protect institutional integrity against what it sees as a sustained campaign of public attacks.
Get your news on the go. Clickhereto follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.
