Do you recall Billy Joel’s song, We Didn’t Start the Fire, which topped the US Billboard Top 100 in December 1989? The song’s lyrics consist of brief, rapid-fire allusions to more than 100 international headlines spanning the period from 1949, when he was born, to 1989, the year of the song’s release, when he turned 40. The idea for the song origi- nated with him questioning the events in his lifetime, which defined it but had, somehow, seemingly been forgotten.

Despite topping the music charts, Blender, an American music magazine, ranked the song forty-first on its list of the ‘50 Worst Songs Ever’. Considering that the list also included songs by Paul McCartney and Simon & Garfunkel, Joel is not in bad company. In its critique, Blender said the song “resembles a term paper scribbled the night before it’s due”.

A ‘term paper’, or ‘research paper or project’, is a paper written by students during an academic term and submitted at the end of the term. It accounts for a significant part of the subject grade.

To a number of high-profile ‘academically qualified’ individuals, the concept of a ‘term paper’ is seemingly just as fictitious as their own graduation ceremony.

If you can carry a tune, you could, with some artistic licence, turn into song those whom media reports have named as having made unsubstantiated claims about their academic qualification: Daniel Mtimkulu, Pallo Jordan, Yoliswa Pikie, Ellen Tshabalala, Hlaudi Motsoeneng, Nico Bezuidenhout, Mohau Pheko, Dudu Myeni, Tembakazi Mnyaka, Carl Niehaus, Vincent Mdunge, Sicelo Shiceka and Mninwa Mahlangu. This list is by no means exhaustive; according to recent media reports, as many as 640 public-sector officials have misrepresented their qualifications.

Have you spot anything of interest? The individuals either head up a State-owned enterprise in acting or substantive capacity or are senior government employees or officials.

It is interesting to observe that, in the current dispensation, there are no longer ‘civil servants’; rather, they are ‘officials’. Blanche David-Gallardo, of the Philippine Daily Inquirer, states it best in ‘The difference between a public servant and a public official’: “By referring to our public servants as officials, we subvert our own role as boss and become complicit in their failure to deliver genuine public service.” Could this explain the lack of, besides others, service, respect and accountability?

The scourge of misrepresentation of qualifications shows no sign of abating any time soon. Several commentators have called for ‘naming and shaming’ initiatives. The only problem is that the perpetrators tend to be immune to shame.

It appears the course of action to take should you be exposed as having misrepresented your qualifications is to simply unleash a personal attack on the character of the person or persons (whistleblowers) who had the audacity to question your ‘qualifications’ and exposed you. If this fails, your boss jumps to your defence, citing how competent you have been in your position and your success – in other words, the lack of destruction of the institution you lead. Alternatively, you could cite discrimination of various forms. But, above all, whatever you do, stay put. Firmly so. Do not move or offer to do so, and wait for others to decide your fate. You might well be redeployed. If you are one of the unfortunate ones, a rare exception, then depart, claiming a moral victory, but do so without offering any amends or reparation – including apologising to the whistleblower or for the reputational damage caused to any person or the institution through your attack or contention. Do not offer to repay the ill-gained financial remuneration of your deception. Wait for the dust to settle, then re-emerge.

The most worrying aspect of all this is that the misrepresentation of qualifications is generally not considered to constitute fraud and, thus, no prosecution follows. The individuals are merely allowed to resign without further consequence. Not being a lawyer, nor a politician for that matter, I perceive it as fraud and an act of multiple thefts. It is a theft of position attained at the expense of a better-qualified person; the other person is deprived of not only an opportunity, but also a future and an improvement in his or her living condition.

Yet, somehow, the perpetrators view the misrepresentation of qualifications as a victimless crime that causes no harm to anyone. Qualifica- tion misrepresentation also destroys the credibility of South Africa’s educational institutions, since the perpetrators also attack academic institutions, claiming flaws in their record keeping. It raises questions about the validity of South African educational qualifications and undermines South Africa’s educational system. To cap it all, it disrespects hard-working students who put in the hours and incur substantial financial expense, only to lose a position to a dishonest individual. If deprived of employment, how are these students able to settle their student debt?
It is most ironic that those who fraudulently misrepresent their qualifications appreciate the value of academic qualifications so much so that they perpetrate a crime in order to ‘attain’ the qualifications. If they desire and value the academic qualification, why then do they not value the process to attain them legitimately?

Why is nothing done to remedy the situation? Why are academic qualifications not verified, and those found to have committed misrepresentation not prosecuted?

Surely, it should be a standard requirement to subject those applying for a position to verification, including South African Qualifications Authority’s (Saqa’s) verification. According to Saqa, school-leaving certificates are the most faked qualifications, at 41%, followed by degrees, at 32%, and diplomas, at 13%.

As to why those in positions of prominence misrepresent their qualifications, Zingisa Mkhuma, in her article for IOL News, entitled ‘Inside the minds of CV cheats’, cites University of the Witwatersrand psychology associate professor Sumaya Laher, who blames “the dark triad” of personality traits, namely Machiavellianism, narcissism and psychopathy. Machiavellianism is characterised by a duplicitous (deceitful) interpersonal style, a cynical disregard for morality and a focus on self-interest and personal gain. In Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli’s sixteen- century treatise, The Prince, political expediency is placed above morality, and craft and deceit are used to maintain authority and carry out the policies of a ruler. (Should you be interested, there is a self-assessment personality survey of Machiavellianism called the ‘MACH-IV test’.) But the misrepresentation of academic qualifications is only part of a bigger problem – another crime being perpetrated is the attainment of qualifications by dishonest means. (This warrants its own column.) Last year, the media reported that cheating was rife at South African universities.

With the South African economy in a growth trap and qualifications seemingly perceived as ensuring easy access to employment, the misrepresentation of qualifications will continue, unless there is political will and a concerted effort is made to eradicate the scourge.