Wilgenhof: 121-year-old residence set to be closed for a year

The Stellenbosch University (SU) council has announced the closure of the controversial Wilgenhof men’s residence in its current form. This will “pave the way for a reimagined and revitalised male residence”.

In a statement released on Monday night, the SU explained: “The new residence will honour Wilgenhof’s constructive aspects. However, we will make a definite break from the unacceptable and secretive practices of the past.”

To implement this change, the residence will undergo upgrades in 2025. This will align with the higher education department’s standards for student housing at public universities. The 121-year-old residence is set to reopen in 2026 as a male residence. It’s still uncertain if the name will be changed.

All current Wilgenhof residents who meet the academic requirements for re-placement and wish to remain in SU residences will be accommodated in other university residences for 2025. In 2025, they will have the opportunity to apply for placement in 2026 in accordance with the SU residence placement policy, the statement read.

Shocking discoveries in two Wilgenhof rooms

On 9 January this year, the SU unlocked two rooms in the residence. A panel was then appointed by the rectorate to investigate the contents of reportedly ritualistic items and practices in the two rooms, namely:

• Hool 88, a room on the ground floor of the main Wilgenhof building facing the quad. In this room, Wilgenhof’s internal disciplinary committee, “the Nagligte”, conducted their activities at night.
• The other room in question was “Toe Argief” (English: closed archive or TA). The room was located in the ‘Bachelors’ wing of Wilgenhof, adjoining the Primarius’ suite.

The TA contained a trove of Wilgenhof records and memorabilia. This included Nagligte costumes, shoes, and paraphernalia, reads a report issued by the SU. The panel was instructed to investigate the historical and cultural background of the contents, as well as the functions of the rooms.

They were also tasked to determine whether (and to what extent) practices and the general culture of Wilgenhof could be contrary to the values ​​of SU and whether they could infringe on the human dignity of current and former SU staff and students.

The number “88” frequently appears on Nagligte costumes, in the naming of “Hool 88”, and elsewhere.

Experts confirmed to the panel that “88” is associated with white supremacy, referencing “Heil Hitler” (H being the eighth letter of the alphabet).

The number 88 was used in the two rooms to convey notions of white supremacy, the panel found.

The internal report recommended the closure of Wilgenhof, citing allegations of racism and abusive initiation practices involving first-year students.

Alumni association questions panel’s findings

The Wilgenhof Alumni Association has strongly opposed the panel’s findings, warning of significant consequences if the residence is shut down.

“The residence was at the centre of an often misleading and sensationalised media storm after photos of two rooms at the residence were published in January,” said spokesperson Jaco Rabie.

On the association, the university said on Monday, “The role played by the Wilgenhof Alumni Association going forward needs to be aligned with that played by other SU Alumni Associations”.

‘No space for unacceptable and secretive practices’

Based on the panel’s findings, Rector and Vice-Chancellor Professor Wim de Villiers – backed unanimously by the rectorate – recommended to the council that the residence should be closed in its current form and alternative uses for the buildings should be considered.

Nevertheless, the council decided that in light of the complexities of the situation, the rector’s recommendation warranted further consultation and consideration. On 26 June, it invited all interested parties to submit written representations on how to address the issue.

Chair of SU’s Council, Nicky Newton-King, said on Monday, “The decision [to not close Wilgenhof permanently] follows the many submissions received regarding the future of the residence. It is clear from the submissions that there are elements of the Wilgenhof culture that are intended to promote wholesome outcomes like independent thinking and camaraderie. The SU should seek to preserve this.  However, the council is clear that there is no space in a modern values-based university for unacceptable and secretive practices (whether disciplinary or otherwise) that are not aligned with SU’s values.”

NOW READ: D-day for Wilgenhof as Stellenbosch University council decides on closure