Jeremy, this is astonishing. So Ratsara actually left with dignity?j
dignity is in the eye of its possessor…if ratsara thought he left with dignity, or if TW gave him the impression that he had it in his power to leave with dignity, he left with dignity…
keep in mind that men in ratsara’s age and race demographic had to take advantage of every straw they could find to survive in apartheid, and even post-apartheid, s. africa…i still suspect that TW took all of this into account when he told him to sleep on whether to resign from the SID presidency…that is, even if ratsara’s degree had been fraudulently obtained, which a UNISA investigation has now disproven, TW’s course represents maximum mercy for ratsara’s no doubt difficult life…in retrospect, TW’s course can be seen to have been wise…the fact that ratsara has been exonerated means giving ratsara the opportunity to choose to leave was far more prudent than the sacking many, including the concerned academics, were demanding…
what remains to be seen now is what the group of concerned academics will come up with next, given UNISA’s findings…at the very least, i suspect they will do something to resurrect their obviously compromised influence…i think they need to, for their own sake…
It was an open letter these academics submitted to our GC leadership. What’s the proper response to the result of the UNISA investigation? Deafening silence?
Another report on the issue at hand.
Good sir in 2011 Ratsara bought a PHD and used that PhD to get into the UNISA programme. Now explain to me why exactly a president firstly needs a PHD and secondly why a supposed leader of his supposed stature would do a thing like that? Explain to me what his why cannot be found anywhere and why he won’t provide it either…explain to me why the people tasked with the audit were persuaded not to talk to all the exco memebers except Ratsara and Bonyna… there is a response coming and you and many others won’t like it. Ratsara has proven to be a liar in chief who operates like a dictator in the presidency.
You may address me either by my surname or first name. Both are acceptable in my Southeast Asian culture. I had lived briefly in 4 African countries but not South Africa in particular. I would hesitate to generalize regarding African culture. Regarding the result of the UNISA investigation, are you not questioning the academic integrity of the UNISA programme? If you were with UNISA, will you accept a diploma mill PhD as part of any prospective student’s application? Did not Elder Ratsara ably and successfully defend the doctoral thesis he submitted to UNISA?
this is certainly going to be very interesting…
Hey Clinton, what is your gut feeling on why Ratsara’s dissertation has been so hidden? UNISA says it’s online, and it is not. Ratsara never produced it to the public, Has anyone ever seen it???
Per Tichy, something is FISHY!!!
Exactly you work so hard on a PHD but you want to hide it ?? Why ? He is happy to share his faith tho ? just not his supposed hard work.
Perhaps there is TOO much emphasis on Academia [Ph.D’s and such], rather than on
qualifications that are MUCH MORE important.
Perhaps Honesty, Integrity, are lost sight of. And prestige and Honor and Power are the
goals instead that are sought after as one “rises to the top” of Adventist Culture.
Jeremy Vandieman, Perhaps you might ask: Where are the original documents on WO from the SIDs BRC which Mr. Ratsara was supposed to presented to the TOSC - which he did not present, but instead presented his own take (along with Daniel Bediako)? Also, Why are these documents not on the Adventist Archives with the other division BRC papers?
Check here to see that the SID BRC Research papers are not included: https://www.adventistarchives.org/division-biblical-research-committees
Moreover, IF Mr. Ratsara did nothing questionable, Why did the SID officially vote to express their displeasure with the manner in which Mr. Ratsara acquired his ThD qualification - in their official Minutes of SID ExecComm (see below)? Of course UNISA is very eager to exonerate Mr. Ratsara, because in exonerating Mr. Ratsara they also exonerate themselves.
WHEREAS the SID EXCOM noted a detailed presentation from Paul Ratsara pertaining, inter alia, to support he received in the compilation of his ThD qualification obtained from UNISA; and NOTING that there may be some diverse interpretations on what would constitute possible excessive reliance on research support Paul Ratsara may have received in the compilation of his ThD Thesis; and NOTING further that, according to Paul Ratsara, the ThD qualification passed the institutional test of plagiarism by UNISA; VOTED in the context of the aforegoing and only limited thereto, to express the EXCOM’s displeasure to Paul Ratsara for the manner in which he acquired his ThD qualification.”
From what I read, UNISA claims Mr. Ratsara’s dissertation is in the library - that is, it is NOT ONLINE - with the rest of the doctoral dissertations. And why would that be? Could it be that Mr. Ratsara and UNISA have agreed not to put it online (for the world to see) because then the world might know that Mr. Ratsara and Mr. Hopeson Bonya (and UNISA) are all covering for each other - and that Mr. Ratsara grabbed the dissertation of Dr. Daniel Bediako (AIIAIS) and used it for his own purposes, and without Bediako’s express permission - to present at the TOSC?
The trend at UNISA has been to have a WRITTEN doctoral defense - not an oral one. Although, more recently, there are both written and oral defenses, according to what I understand. (Maybe that will now be changed?).
Dr Hopeson Bonya must have seen the final product of Elder Ratsara’s PhD thesis since Bonya claims to have ghost-written 5 chapters of the same. Also the 16 academics (including Clint?), if not all of them, must have seen it in order to make a judgment regarding Elder Ratsara’s integrity. Members of the SID executive committee as well? All the above’s collective judgment versus the result of UNISA’s inquest. Who is telling the truth?
So, why is is that after a LIST of SID ExComm members was presented to UNISA, only Mr. Ratsara and Mr. Hopeson Bonya were interviewed by this “independent” investigation? Could it be that UNISA’s job for the independent investigation was really mainly to protect the integrity of UNISA? (I have heard that Professor Zide, who had promised to provide emailed feedback and updates on the matter, has now gone into hiding).
I understand that the GC President was instrumental in stopping an independent forensic investigation into this matter. Why would this be? Why wouldn’t he do all he could to clear the name of the church and its employees (Mr. Ratsara, Mr. Bonya)?
Vandieman, But don’t you find it strange that even though the “independent” investigation was given a list of all members of the SID ExComm, that only Mr. Ratsara and Mr. Bonya were interviewed? Why would that be? Especially since Mr. Bonya confessed in an SID ExecComm meeting?
Why didn’t the UNISA investigators also say that they saw the official SID ExecComm Minutes - where Mr. Hopeson Bonya confessed?
Why didn’t the UNISA investigators also say that they interviewed the OTHER members of the SID ExecComm members?
One think I know for sure, when everyone is lying, nobody is telling the truth…
Really? I haven’t heard that. Where did you get it from? This is interesting…
Why should these academicians reply at this point? I would imagine they will wisely wait for various reasons - for starters:
Until ANY/ALL of the SID BRC papers (on women’s ordination) surface on the Adventist Archives website. Sokingcoo, Can you find them and provide them here for us (LINK?) - thus far, they are yet to be found by those who have tried. Why would this be, when other Division BRC papers ARE (or WERE) on the website?
Until UNISA provides Mr. Ratsara’s doctoral thesis/dissertation online for the world to access - as are the other doctoral dissertations. Keep in mind that UNISA has had written defenses, not always oral defenses. Don’t you wonder why it is that Mr. Ratsara’s dissertation is not online like other dissertations?
Until it is known why evidently only Mr. Ratsara and Mr. Bonya were interviewed by UNISAs “independent” investigation (even though they received a LIST of the SID ExecComm - in which Bonya confessed). Why wouldn’t this independent group also interview the other members of the SID ExecComm?
Until UNISA can provide evidence that their independent investigation was actually independent - in otherwords, did UNISA pay the investigators to clear their own UNISA name? It is understandable that UNISA would want to exonerate Mr. Ratsara, because it exonerates UNISA as well (for UNISA apparently allowing Mr. Ratsara into the doctoral program without properly vetting Mr. Ratsara’s degree documentation).
Until UNISA and its independent investigators verify that they have seen the original official SID ExecComm Minutes where Mr. Hopeson Bonya confessed to writing 5 of the 6 chapters of Mr. Ratsara’s dissertation.
Because Mr. Ratsara was Mr. Bonya’s superior/boss at the time. When someone asked Mr. Bonya why he did that for Mr. Ratsara, Mr. Bonya replied: What could I do - he was my boss.