Fed Govt and the ‘sacked’ vice chancellors By Idowu Akinlotan

nigeria-flag

While the furore surrounding the 2016 federal budget was yet to abate, another perhaps more embarrassing one flared about two weeks ago with the report of the removal of 13 federal university (including the National Open University) vice chancellors.

The Federal Ministry of Education’s statement announcing the removal, however, said nothing about sack. All the statement did was to announce President Muhamau Buhari’s approval of the appointment of the new 13 university helmsmen. “The President, Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces  and Visitor to all federal universities, President Muhammadu Buhari, GCFR, has approved the appointment of new vice chancellors for the 12 under-listed Federal Universities and the National Open University of Nigeria with effect from Friday, February 12, 2016,” the statement said tersely. But because the tenure of four of the VCs was yet to end, it was generally assumed that the 13 university administrators had been sacked. This news was compounded by the federal government’s prior dissolution of the 13 universities’ Governing Councils, the body statutorily empowered to initiate the appointment or sacking of vice chancellors. Immediately after appointing the new VCs, the Education ministry appeared poised to announce the constitution of the 13 Governing Councils. The statement was silent over why the four VCs whose tenure had not yet ended were also replaced.

Shortly after news of the peremptory changes in the 13 universities was published, a number of civil society organisations and other stakeholders condemned the Education ministry for taking that precipitate step. About nine of the vice chancellors, they argued, had already handed over to successors who would preside over their universities in acting capacity from February 15. The critics also condemned what they described as the parochialism of the ministry which appointed many of the new VCs from one university. According to them, “(The minister) appointed six professors from one university, Bayero University, Kano, and he posted them to different tertiary institutions. Not only that, he also appointed two professors from Katsina State, bringing the total to eight friends from just two states in the North.” In their earlier statement, the civil society groups had indicated that four of the new VCs came from Bayero University. A few days later, perhaps after crosschecking their facts, they raised the figure to six. The Education ministry, however, responded last week that the changes would not be reversed.

It must be assumed that the Ministry of Education did not lie about the appointments being approved by the president. If this is so, it is doubly embarrassing. First, the Education ministry probably has a legal department that should have advised against the method embarked upon by the ministry to effect changes in the universities. But even if there was no legal department, there is hardly any graduate in Nigeria who is ignorant of the procedure involved in selecting vice chancellors. The ministry was completely and embarrassingly negligent in carrying out this rather simple task. Why the haste? Second, assuming the Education ministry did not know what to do, the visitor to the universities, to whom the process of appointing vice chancellors is not strange, should have taken caution. The presidency cannot also claim to be ignorant of the processes. Indeed, after botching the computation and presentation of the 2016 federal budget, the presidency should have been generally more careful about its subsequent actions, policies and processes.

Neither the presidency nor the Education ministry has offered cogent reasons for the abridgement of the process of appointing VCs. If it is assumed they made a mistake, they would be accused of incompetence or confusion. But if it is assumed they knew what they were doing, knew the laws, and yet acted in the manner they did, then it would be concluded that impunity is the government’s administrative leitmotif. The position the Buhari presidency has found itself, after the budget embarrassment, is not flattering at all. The civil society groups tried to lessen the damage to the president by suggesting that the ministry was derelict in its responsibility of advising and guiding him on the right steps to take in appointing new university administrators. This is a hard sell. Both the presidency and the ministry are to blame for this misstep. Indeed, all the facts point to the conclusion that the Education ministry knowingly and mischievously effected the changes, and the presidency was inexplicably careless. But in their intervention last week, the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) indicated that the 12 universities founded by the Jonathan government were not backed by law, implying that fundamentally, no law was breached when both the VCs and the Governing Councils were sacked. However, the government would have demonstrated good faith if they first enacted the law, then emplaced the Councils, and then proceeded to activate the appointments of the VCs. In effect, regardless of the ASUU explanation, the Education ministry still acted mala fide.

While it is not clear yet how many of the VCs came from Bayero University and what their states of origin are — whether four as the protesting groups first said, or six as they later announced — there is indication that some top ministry officials do not seem to have the expansiveness needed to function at the federal level and, additionally, the instinctive appreciation of the characteristics of a complex, multi-layered society like Nigeria. How could they make that kind of mistake, or hope to get away with it? Henceforth, every appointment they make will be examined with a fine toothcomb for ethnic and religious diversity and compliance. It is all the more dismal that even in its response, the Education ministry has said nothing about the disproportionate number of new VCs from Bayero University. Could they be unaware of the implication, or of the poor image for the ministry which that skewed appointment elicits?

The Education ministry will struggle to correct these twin errors of impunity and parochialism. Whether they will be successful or not remains to be seen. And because the ministry’s statement suggested the president’s endorsement, the Buhari government will also find it difficult to completely absolve itself of blame. Sadly, rather than make progress in ethnic and religious relations, the divisions and schisms in the polity are either widening or worse, hardening. The Olusegun Obasanjo presidency between 1999 and 2007 achieved some success in spreading appointments across the country and deepening ethnic amity. His immediate successor, the late Umaru Yar’Adua, was unfortunately accused of handing the country over to a Katsina cabal, despite his own seeming personal cosmopolitanism. The Goodluck Jonathan government did not fare better than his predecessor. He was also, with some justification, accused of the worst forms of parochialism as he subjected the country to his acolytes from the South-South and Southeast.

If the Buhari presidency is to avoid the pitfalls that unnerved and humiliated his predecessors, he will need to take more forceful and proactive steps in demolishing the barriers that have divided Nigerians for decades. The Education ministry’s missteps in the appointment of vice chancellors are an indication of the vestigial problems the country must consciously and bravely grapple with, but which the Buhari government has so far paid scant attention to. The rule of law and adherence to due process should not be a source of controversy at all. Nigerian officials must internalise these fine administrative attributes. Had the Senate done its work in screening ministers as intensively and comprehensively as the situation demands, many closet extremists and ethnocentric officials would be weeded out. It is time political leaders exhibited the consciousness that conduce to the running of a just and egalitarian society. Those who can’t shape up could choose to remain ethnic and religious champions, far from the multicultural arena both the people of Nigeria and the constitution envisage.

Not only must the Minister of Education address the controversial appointments, explaining convincingly why he bypassed due process, he must take firm steps to redress the skewness of the appointments and restore confidence in his ability and capacity to promote and nurture fairness. He owes the country an explanation. If he will not address the matter, the Buhari presidency, which was quoted as having approved the postings, should step in and remedy the situation in order not to be accused of complicity in what is obviously an embarrassing and unforced error. The problems in the education sector are too gargantuan to be subjected to silly mistakes.

NATION

END

CLICK HERE TO SIGNUP FOR NEWS & ANALYSIS EMAIL NOTIFICATION

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.