HEADLINES:
R/€ 
Oil Spurned girlfriend opened can of worms
February 28, 2008 Edition 1
Staff Reporters
One of the student makers of the infamous racist "initiation" video at the University of Free State could not have imagined that dumping his girlfriend would lead to a nationwide storm over the race row video, fellow students said.
The four white students and their lawyers are mounting a counter-attack in the face of looming criminal charges, as the fury over the humilation of black cleaners mounts.
Yesterday several students came to their defence, saying the video was shot five months ago in what they said was a legitimate attempt to highlight the "dangers" of the integration of student residences.
The filmed "initiation" of members of the university's cleaning staff had been edited out of the video and stored in a computer file, these students said.
But when the video maker decided to move on to another woman, his ex-girlfriend allegedly decided to distribute the disturbing video among students on campus.
Now the clips, showing white students abusing black staff at the university, have sparked an avalanche of condemnation, a human rights complaint and a criminal investigation.
The cleaners are reportedly receiving counselling and have been ordered not to talk to the media by the National Education Health and Allied Workers' Union (Nehawu) in a bid to protect them.
Two of the students seen in the video have been barred from the campus. The other two completed their studies last year.
The video shows a white student allegedly urinating on food that cleaning staff are given to eat while on their knees.
The "stars" of the show were repeatedly called "whores" and made to dance and play rugby.
However, residents of the Reitz hostel - where the video was made - characterised it as "a Leon Schuster movie gone wrong".
Reitz hostel head Pieter Odendaal showed the entire video to reporters yesterday.
He said no student had urinated on the food. Water had been squeezed into the bowl from a bottle.
"If you watch the video, you can hear them squeezing the bottle."
Although he did not condone the video, Odendaal said parts were "taken out of context and blown out of proportion".
Nico Naude of Honey Attorneys in Bloemfontein, representing the two students still at the university, told the Cape Argus this morning: "There was never any urine involved.
I can deny that there were any human rights abuses at all. The whole thing is a farce … This was supposed to have been shown at a 'cultural evening' a satire in which a multi-racial audience would have laughed at themselves.
"The cleaners 'skweezas', as they are known were full participants in this," Naude said. Students were usually close to these women and considered them surrogate mothers during their years of study.
But the National Prosecuting Authority has confirmed it was taking the footage very seriously and investigating possible charges of assault and crimen injuria.
"On the face of it, the conduct is grossly inhumane and constitutes a gross violation of rights.," NPA spokesman Tlali Tlali said.
The tension boiled over on campus yesterday when police clashed with student protesters angered by the video.
This followed several protest marches last week over the university's newly implemented hostel integration policy.
The campus was calm early this morning. According to black students who took part in yesterday's protest march, all they want to do is to return to class today.
It is believed that they have given the management of the university five days to come up with a plan to deal with racial tension on campus.
Although Nehawu is asking the cleaners to not talk to the media, one of them said that she and her colleagues "needed help" and wanted to talk. She did not specify what kind of help she needed.
Neither the woman nor her colleagues got to give their side of the story because a Nehawu member arrived and told her not to speak to anyone.
The woman was then whisked away to the Nehawu regional office in the Bloemfontein CBD.
There media representatives were met by Nehawu's regional executive.
The cleaner was in a separate room, as Nehawu staff insisted she did not want to speak. Instead, the union would release a statement.
The Nehawu officials were told that preventing the woman from speaking was a violation of section 16 of the constitution.
When given the chance to talk, the woman said she was traumatised.
"I am still getting flashbacks over the incident. I want to talk about this but only in the presence of some of the cleaners, because I am not the only person this happened to," she said.
The SA Human Rights Commission's Mothusi Lepheana said the HRC intended to investigate not only the video incident but several other incidents of alleged racism on the campus.
When Lepheana tried to enter the varsity's Reitz hostel to carry out an inspection, the university's head of security refused him entry, saying the situation was too tense.
He eventually gained entry to the residence with a police escort, where he was met by a barricade of furniture.
University rector Professor Frederick Fourie condemned the video and the "gross violation of human rights" it portrayed. He promised to deal "swiftly and firmly" with the matter.
He had met the workers shown on the video and apologised in person, and counselling was being arranged.
The lawyer for the two current students, Naude, said he had written to the university asking what disciplinary charges his clients would face.
If criminal charges were laid, he would file a immediate counter-suit in the High Court of "wilful prosecution" by the university.
This procedure was laying a charge against someone when the complainant knew the charges not to be true.
He said he had not been instructed on possible defamation suits on behalf of the young men, but did not rule it out.
© 1999 - 2010 Cape Argus & Independent Online (Pty) Ltd. All rights reserved.