SMACK publicising suspension of student over drugs is unnecessary

St. Mary’s College Kisubi (SMACK), was named after Saint Mary the patroness of Fr.Raux Modeste, the 1906 College founder, “to provide young Catholics with better schooling”.  Reliable sources regard SMACK as one of the most prestigious schools deserving honorable mention in Uganda.

  The college is today owned by the Catholic Archdiocese of Kampala. In the view of the college’s motto;  Duc in Altum (launch in the deep), and owing to the values so dear and central to the teachings of the Catholic church, one would least expect the reputable educational institution for whatever cause to act hastily.

Unfortunately, today, the media is already overwhelmed with the criticism of SMACK for disclosing a student’s suspension.

More than a 100 years in existence is enough for any system to have developed a competent administrative capability for proper management of the integrity and safety of her clients.

Deductively, knowing that the clients of such a reputable institution are directly the youth in the struggle for successfully crossing from childhood to adulthood, SMACK should have appreciated institutional responsibility towards the protection of minors through reasonable punitive measures and human counselling rather than resorting to the search for a cheap presence in the media.

It is now embarrassing that politicised comments are all over the social media platform with a multitude of them castigating the leadership of SMACK for politicking!

Of course, Br. Deodati Aliganyira, who heads SMACK, is expected to have foreseen the regrets which would result from bringing Solomon Sekayi’s childhood wrongdoing, if any, to the public discourse well aware of the social and political relevance and repute of his father, Robert Kyagulanyi Ssentamu (Bobi Wine).

This is why there are so many questions regarding the underlying motive for Deodati’s apparent partiality and publication of ‘Solomon’s sin’.  

The biblical teachings of St. Paul forbid treating as pagans, concerns of the believers. Why then did a consecrated catholic Brother resort to seeking an overwhelm of social justice for a meager disciplinary conflict in a faith-based-school?

If it is because SMACK has not been able to establish a disciplinary committee, it may be understood as a systematic negligence and irresponsibility.

 If it is because SMACK’s leadership is incapable of proportionate negotiation with those parents who trust the school with beloved children, then it is a betray of trust: it is a lack of institutional and administrative integrity, a dishonour to all clients, and a regrettable show of institutional paternalism, insensitivity and moral perfectionism. 

As a matter of fact, by handling Solomon’s wrongdoing with such a bad eye and unequal hand, SMACK has set a historically bad precedence for other educational institutions.

It is not reasonable to be of the view that religious based institutions are intended for promotion of radical intolerance.

 It is not even justifiable that system administrators should face reality with biased attitudes. Worst of all, if that is to be the common practice among those who should be seen to have the full knowledge of virtue, then it is very lamentable.

It is arguable that systematic maturity would entail understanding that issues of school discipline are for handling by the school’s disciplinary committees with the help of school administrations and parents, and with involvement of a concerned victim of indiscipline rather than negligently, as if in a bad spirit, releasing them for every other’s judgment.

 It is not to doubt, therefore, publicising Solomon suspension over ‘drugs’ was unnecessary and inconsistent with the teachings of Christ and human nature.

Stephen Lubuye,

Philosopher and Bioethicist.

Secretary general of Bioethics Development Foundation