Debating Ideas reflects the values and editorial ethos of the African Arguments book series, publishing engaged, often radical, scholarship, original and activist writing from within the African continent and beyond. It offers debates and engagements, contexts and controversies, and reviews and responses flowing from the African Arguments books. It is edited and managed by the International African Institute, hosted at SOAS University of London, the owners of the book series of the same name.
Academic freedom, the cornerstone of intellectual pursuit and quality higher education, faces significant challenges in African universities. A recent online seminar brought together experts from across the continent to reflect on these pressures, particularly in the context of neoliberalism and new managerialism, which often lead to various forms of academic “unfreedoms”.
The panel emerged from CODESRIA’s recent conference, in which participants reflected on the Kampala Declaration of 1990 and the proposed Dar es Salaam Annex to update this.
The seminar highlighted that academic freedom is crucial for scientific progress, the pursuit of truth, research, and the quality of higher education. Yet, it remains uncertain in practice. In Africa, this challenge is amplified by the close relationship between most universities and ruling political regimes, often resulting in the silencing or challenging of intellectual freedom.
Keep up with the latest headlines on WhatsApp | LinkedIn
Zimbabwe: case study in politicisation and surveillance
Simbarashe Gukurume illuminated how state surveillance and politicisation in Zimbabwe have severe consequences for knowledge production and intellectual freedom. After independence, the then Prime Minister Robert Mugabe famously stated that “higher education is too important a business to be left entirely to deans, professors, lecturers and university administrators,” signalling an intent to control universities. In 1982, the repealing of the Royal Charter and the imposition of the University of Zimbabwe Act fundamentally undermined academic freedom and institutional autonomy. This Act made the President of Zimbabwe the Chancellor of all state universities, granting them authority to appoint senior administrators (like the Vice-Chancellor) who often became political appointments.
The 1990 amendment further entrenched the power of the Chancellor and Vice-Chancellor, leading to intensified deployment of state security operatives, plainclothes spies, and central intelligence on campus, sometimes masquerading as students or staff. This environment led to the “bifurcation of academics” into “patriotic intellectuals” (who support the ruling party uncritically and enjoy freedoms) and “sellout intellectuals” (who are critical of the ruling party and face harassment, arrest, imprisonment, are denied promotion, and face victimisation). The “sellout” is depicted as someone whose life is “disposable and considered less important,” reflecting a “necropolitical practice” of the state. The state achieves this by compelling the university to produce a narrow, patriotic discourse and by funding research and knowledge production that foregrounds the ruling party (ZANU-PF) propaganda. Thus, instead of propagating critical and scientific knowledge, the university is reduced to a propaganda-churning institution where critical scholarship is regarded as a threat to national security and critical academics are labelled and criminalised as enemies of the state.
Uganda: “silent attacks” on academic freedom
Robert Kakuru detailed numerous “silent attacks” at Makerere University, many of which resonate across the continent. The list of such attacks is long and includes: self-censorship among staff members, who fear expressing their opinions on various platforms; police crackdowns on free association of staff and students associations, preventing staff and students from organising assemblies or executive meetings; false accusations and interdiction of leaders to “gag members”; warning letters to vocal staff and malicious transfers of these staff to disorganise them; deliberate frustration of the university staff tribunal, denying staff justice when suspended or dismissed; denial of promotions and post-retirement contracts for critical voices, effectively gagging professors; appointment of faculty on contract terms rather than permanent terms to control and subdue them, leading to fear of non-renewal of such contracts; removal from official university email lists, and vetting of emails to control information dissemination; denial of venues for meetings, and suspension of forums perceived as not “pro-management”; removal of funding for staff associations to weaken them; and clamping down on discussion on macro political and civic issues such as detention without trial and harassment of opposition political parties. A case in point was a lecturer from the School of Law who was investigated for setting an exam that was perceived to be critical of the Speaker of Parliament. Such actions erode the core foundations of academia and national democratic institutions that rely on critical thinking. This creates a fertile ground for controlling the national political narrative. In the face of harassment, including unjustifiable warning and suspension letters, many staff associations and their members choose acquiescence as self-preservation in fear of reprisal from the university administration.
Structural barriers in Kenya and beyond
Felishana Cherop presented a scoping review of the literature on academic freedom and governance, which revealed that political interference and centralised governance systems in African universities impede faculty involvement in decision-making. Many institutions lack updated laws and policies to safeguard academic freedom. The analysis also points towards an increasing shift towards profit-driven models of higher education, where faculty roles are increasingly treated as “service provision” rather than “intellectual contribution and knowledge production”. This trend can be observed in the rapid expansion of private universities and satellite campuses, which prioritise market demand, leading to the domination of programmes in fields such as business and ICT. This not only narrows the academic space but also sidelines spaces for the development of critical inquiry, innovation and democratic engagement.
Internal complicity and the neoliberal university
Sioux McKenna argued that many of the constraints preventing universities from acting as a “common good” come from within the university, suggesting that academics are “somehow complicit”. Universities have increasingly adopted a neoliberal understanding, narrowing their purpose to providing “private goods” and “economic goods”, such as training for industry and credentialing for social mobility, rather than serving the “common good” of society and the planet. This short-term financial logic, though appearing to enhance stability by attracting higher fees and state funding, has “terrible long-term consequences,” turning the academy into a “sophisticated training centre” rather than a true common good.
Managerialism, rooted in new public management and neoliberalism, promises to make organisations efficient by managing every cycle, using numbers to monitor behaviour, and overseeing quality. But McKenna argues it leads to academics feeling less professional, less trusted, less valued, and more unhappy. Their professional identity is eroded as their job becomes about “following the rules” and becoming a “service provider”. Examples include the proliferation of Deputy Vice-Chancellors and Executive Directors, taking powers away from academics; the shift from deans representing faculty to executive deans representing management; and management staff on short-term contracts who might pursue “slash and burn” policies. The focus on metrics means that “if something isn’t measured, it soon is seen not to count,” stripping the underlying value of complex academic activities.
Academics now constitute a smaller proportion of university staff (less than 50% in South Africa, sometimes less than 30%), leading to Senates and Faculty Boards becoming “spaces of rubber stamping” where real decisions are made “behind closed doors”. McKenna argues that the insistence on titles and protocols can also be used to “jostle for power” and “force people to stay in their lane,” contributing to the loss of academic freedoms through small, everyday practices.
The Way Forward
Despite these significant challenges, the seminar also highlighted strategies for resistance and fostering academic freedom through collective action and institutional reform.
Academic staff associations have demonstrated their potential as vehicles for resistance through strategic litigation, public advocacy, and the creation of alternative communication channels. These associations have shown that sustained pressure through press statements, consistent engagement with university councils and government bodies, and the development of independent information systems can bypass controlled institutional communication. The power of regular staff assemblies and strategic partnerships with civil society organisations has proven particularly effective in maintaining momentum for academic freedom. However, the effectiveness of these efforts remains constrained by political interference, self-censorship among members, weakened legal frameworks, member apathy, and chronic underfunding that limits sustained advocacy efforts.
There is an urgent need for deeper research into alternative governance models that can strengthen faculty voice and participation. This includes fostering stronger collaborations between academic institutions and civil society organizations, advocating for genuinely participatory governance structures, and building robust legal protections that can withstand political pressure. The development of these alliances requires sustained commitment to collective action and shared advocacy strategies.
Perhaps most fundamentally, there is a pressing need to reclaim and redefine the university’s core purpose in opposition to neoliberal market logics. This involves fostering regular institutional conversations about the university’s role as a social structure fundamentally committed to knowledge creation and dissemination rather than profit generation. Such resistance requires embedding practices of empathy and kindness as deliberate political acts that counter the individualistic and competitive dynamics of neoliberalism. Academics must actively resist conceptualisations of the university as merely a brand that sells qualifications, instead advocating for institutions grounded in collective commitment and solidarity. The creation of spaces for collaboration and mutual support becomes essential, as does the development of broader pan-African networks that can address these systemic constraints through coordinated collective action rather than isolated institutional responses.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
Conclusion
Ultimately, protecting academic freedom is not just about the welfare of staff but is fundamental for the integrity and legitimacy of higher education institutions themselves, ensuring trustworthy research and the quality of knowledge produced. Student voices play a key role in this through student representation in bodies where decisions about the academic project are made can ensure a more widespread and diverse understanding of academic freedom and ensure that those willing to protect such freedoms are many from across varied stakeholder groups. As Samuel Fongwa noted, proposed African initiatives for systematically monitoring and reporting on academic freedoms and providing platforms to engage on academic freedom issues, as provided by CODESRIA and other partners and stakeholders, are crucial in addressing these “unfreedoms”. The conversation must continue.
Sioux McKenna is a Professor of Higher Education Studies Centre for Postgraduate Studies at Rhodes University, South Africa. Felishana Cherop is a Tutorial Fellow in the School of Business and Economics, Department of Management Science, Moi University, Kenya. Samuel Fongwa is a Program Officer within the Training, Grants and Fellowships programme at CODESRIA. Prior to joining the Council, he had spent about seven years at the Human Sciences Research Council where he joined as a Post doctoral Fellow and exited as Senior Research Specialist. Simbarashe Gukurume is a senior lecturer at Sol Plaatje University, Kimberly, South Africa. Robert Kakuru is a Human Rights Lecturer at Makerere University, Uganda.