By Sufyan Abbas Mohammed
In 2012, a zonal branch of the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) embarked on a strike action to protest the ‘arbitrariness in appointing a vice chancellor’ for the River State University of Science and Technology, Port Harcourt. The sin of the then Governor of Rivers State, Rotimi Amaechi and the Pro-Chancellor of the University, Justice Karibi White, was that the appointment was made without recourse to the laid down rules.
A more grievous scenario emerged last week with the swift sack of 12 Vice Chancellors and that of the National Open University of Nigeria [NOUN], in what is seen as an outright violation of the laws of the university.
Nothing demonstrates the incongruity of this latest appointment in the ivory tower more than the reaction of one of the beneficiaries, Najatu Muhammad, who took up space in a paid advertisement to reject her selection as the chairperson of the governing council of the Dutse Federal University.
As a means of poignantly capturing the drama, an online newspaper wrote: “Northern politician and activist, Najatu Muhammad, has rejected a federal appointment through the same channel by which she was appointed – newspaper!.”
Muhammad, a staunch supporter of President Muhammadu Buhari and an associate of the president’s wife, is no doubt, eminently qualified for the office, being a university don. But she turned down the offer on the grounds of principle, adducing the following reasons:
“It’s however unfortunate that I was not consulted before the announcement in the media. I also regret that I have to use the same medium to announce that I can’t accept the appointment for personal reasons.”
It is really very strange that Vice Chancellors and members of university governing boards would be hastily selected and announced without recourse to established procedures.
Surprisingly, giving the oddity of this development in the university system, one would have expected a confrontation to come from the custodians and watchmen of all that is good in the process-driven, sacred ground of the ivory tower.
While, questions are now being raised from many quarters, not a whimper has emanated from the camp of the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU), the traditional campus standard bearer.
The main redeeming voice so far, challenging this illegality, came from the Coalition of Civil Society Groups (CCSG) protesting what they called illegal sack.
In a protest letter by the Coalition to President Buhari, signed by its President, Etuk Bassey Williams and Secretary-General, Ibrahim Abubakar, the group said the action contravened the provisions of the Universities Act No.11 of 1993 (as amended) by decree No.25, 1996 and further amended in 2003 and 2012 respectively and other agreements as contained in the 2009 FGN staff union agreement.
In demanding for the reversal of the action, the group further stated in the petition:
“We are compelled to call your attention owing to the illegality in the removal of Vice Chancellors of 13 Federal Universities including the National Open University of Nigeria and the hasty appointment of friends and cronies in place of those illegally removed from office.
“The constitution is quite clear on the procedures to be followed in the appointment and disengagement of Vice Chancellors and none of these procedures were followed in the above case.
“The appointment of Vice Chancellors is a tenured appointment, which presupposes that every appointee is expected to serve the prescribed number of years as stipulated by the Acts governing the institutions.”
The petitioners further alleged that four out of the 13 newly appointed vice chancellors are from Kano University, an action they said, “was a clear violation of the federal character principle, for Human Rights as claimed by protesters.”[pro_ad_display_adzone id=”70560″]
The Committee of Vice-chancellors of Nigerian Universities (CVC) has also expressed resentment with the development, stressing that it was at variance with the law.
In the statement signed by Professor Michael O. Faborode, Secretary General for the Committee, the University heads noted that “The power to appoint and remove a substantive Vice-Chancellor, and when the need arises, an acting Vice Chancellor, is vested in the Governing Councils. The National Open University has a Council in place. We are now aware that the Councils of the 12 Federal universities were dissolved unceremoniously a day earlier, and the appointment of new ones announced. We have said before that though a 4-year tenure was prescribed for Governing Councils, the reality of change of government may necessitate re-constitution of such Councils if the Government feels compelled to do so. In our candid and unbiased opinion, the Minister should have allowed the new Councils to be properly fully constituted and sworn-in, and then take the statutory responsibility of setting the machinery in motion to appoint the substantive VCs for the universities.”
It is obvious that the position of the law is that Vice Chancellors of Federal Universities are to be appointed by the governing boards which includes members of ASUU, with the approval of the President as the Visitor.
That tradition has been on for a very long time. The only time the Federal Government is permitted by law to appoint pioneer Vice Chancellors s and the registrars are when universities are newly established. This is because there would be no boards in place from the beginning to perform this role, as was the case in the time of the previous administration, when President Jonathan established 12 new universities.
Once the boards are established, subsequent Vice Chancellors are appointed by the board. In the same vein university boards are never dissolved until they complete their tenure.
This was the autonomy that ASUU fought hard for and eventually got, not on a platter, but after a long drawn fierce battle.
One is then surprised that the Government has not only arbitrarily sacked VCs but has also dissolved varsity boards, some still in the middle of terms. For a university system that had suffered many closures resulting from strike actions by the teachers, the country can hardly afford further avoidable breaches to academic calendars.
Even then, the unusual silence from ASUU while the university autonomy is being compromised, is not healthy for the system. There is no doubt that complacency on the part of this otherwise virile and very vocal union would worsen the impunity that is now gradually returning to the university system, at a time that education standards are not at their best.
Would ASUU have been this cooperative under the Jonathan Government? The answer, in my view, is a definite ‘NO’. Certainly, if it had been the previous administrations that was impinging on the rights of the university, the ASUU would have called out its members to embark on an indefinite strike.
There are ample grounds for defiance now, especially as the Government which is yet to lay out a single policy proposal on education, is seen to be reversing the gains of university autonomy. For ASUU, the danger in keeping quiet, apparently in awe of the aura of the “new sheriff in town”, is that they would be tacitly endorsing a regime of impunity and corruption, vices the university lecturers had fought against in the past.
•Mohammed wrote from Yola in Adamawa State
