Targeted exclusion of viable contestants in the appointment of Vice-Chancellor for Nnamdi Azikiwe University: An aberration
By Peter Okonma
There have been several outcries by both members and non-members of the Nnamdi Azikiwe University (NAU) communities since the unpopular set conditions in the advertisement for the position of Vice Chancellor on page 33 of Thursday, 12th September, 2024 of Vanguard Newspaper. Condemnations, abuses, outcries and other negative remarks have greeted the advertisement. The advert has been described in several despicable, unsavory and unpleasant terms as: Politicians have come to mess up the university; “Loss of University Autonomy to the Federal Ministry of Education and National Universities Commission (NUC)”; “War with medical doctors”; “Direct and targeted exclusion of some promising contestants”; “Imposition of contestants from outside NAU”; etc. Also it is reported to some war of words between medical doctor professors (who felt that the advert was to ensure that their man who was to favour them in terms of appointments and infrastructure was the main target for exclusion) and some non-medical professors. Generally, the medical professional body has given notice of intention to withdraw their services to NAU, if the advert is not pulled down. Let us briefly look at each of these concerns:
a. Loss of University Autonomy to external bodies: Undue external incursion in the selection / appointment of Vice Chancellors in Nigerian universities led to the processes that resulted in the enactment of the Universities (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act No. 11, 1993 ensuring that we have more internal than external members of the University Governing council (GC) so as to minimize undue external interference. Due to some shortcomings of this Act, there were other amendments of it resulting in the followings:
Ø The Universities (Miscellaneous Provisions)(Amendment) Act No. 55 of 1993; The Universities (Miscellaneous Provisions)(Amendment) Act No. 25 of 1996;
Ø The Universities (Miscellaneous Provisions)(Amendment) Act 2003, otherwise called The Universities Autonomy Act No. 1, 2007 and
Ø The Universities (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Amendment) Act 2012.
Also, worth mention is that the provisions of The Universities (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act No.11, 1993 and the amendment No. 55 of 1993 as well as No. 25 of 1996 have been adapted and incorporated into the various enabling laws of the Federal Universities in the Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004. It has been reported by legal experts that the amendments of 2003 and 2012 not yet formally incorporated are to be read into the enabling laws under the principle of incorporation by reference. Thus, these laws whether formally incorporated or not, now form integral parts of the enabling laws of all Federal Universities.
Note that from provisions of two new Sections (S.2AA and S.2AAA) introduced by The Universities (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2003 clearly proclaim the autonomy or independence of the Universities. The purpose of these provisions is to liberate the universities from the entanglement of the Civil Service and to enable the Council exercise its powers and perform its functions without undue external interference or influence.
On the appointment of Vice Chancellor, “Universities Autonomy Act” is very helpful here. For example, Section 3 of the Universities (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Amendment) Act No. 25 of 1996 had amended Section 3 of the Principal Act No.11 of 1993 by prescribing a single term of five years for the Vice-Chancellor and the procedure for the appointment. Note that under section 3 of the Principal Act as amended, the power to appoint the Vice-Chancellor now vests in the Governing Council, provided that the latter informs the Visitor after the appointment has been made.
Therefore, it is crystal clear from this provision that the appointment of a Vice-Chancellor is the statutory responsibility of the Governing Council of each University. Once the appointment has been made by the Council, it is legally binding and effective without any input from the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria who is the Visitor of all Federal Universities. The latter has no direct role to play in such appointment. The law only requires the Governing Council to inform him of the appointment after the Council has made the appointment. It is for his information only. The law does not require him to do anything about the appointment. He is not empowered to approve, reject, disapprove, confirm or modify the appointment. The position of the Minister of Education is even more interesting.
In the same manner, the law does not make any reference to the Minister of Education at all. Thus, the Minister has no role to play directly or indirectly in such appointment. In other words, the appointment of a Vice-Chancellor of a Federal University in Nigeria is not the concern of the Minister; it does not concern him; it is none of his business under the extant laws in Nigeria. From the foregoing analysis, any appointment of a Vice-Chancellor made by the President/Visitor is a breach of the extant laws and therefore patently illegal, null and void.
But what do we have in operation? The Federal Ministry of Education has even gone ahead to in the form of a directive spelt out the conditions the Governing councils must comply in appointing of a Vice Chancellor, some independent minded Governing Councils (including NAU in the past) have defied it asserting their autonomy.
It is either that these representatives in University Governing Councils have brain-washed other members of the Governing Councils to see their Ministries Handbook as a “must follow” or that the entire Governing Councils of some of these universities appear ignorant or nonchalant. The Ministries handbook is a 200 page document titled: Reviewed Guidelines/Handbook for The Ministry’s Representatives on the Governing Councils of Federal Tertiary Institutions, November 2023.
The consequence is gradual loss of autonomy to the extent that even most “experienced” make reference to this anomaly as a must follow. It is too bad, as we go back to the pre1993 black days. God forbid.
b. Direct and Targeted Exclusion of some Promising contestants: The conditions for qualification among others included possession of PhD of 15 years; Professorship of not less than 10 years and attraction of four million Naira worth of Research grants to the NAU. Funny enough, the conditions spelt out in the initial Act 11, 1993 stated Senior lecturer but preferably a professor. It was later amended to state only professor. University such as University of Nigeria, Nsukka (UNN) has just: “Must be a professor” without year experience attached. Also it was reported that Prof. Ilochi Okafor, who was a Vice Chancellor around 2004 to 2008 has always been adjudged the best Vice Chancellor, yet he was about two years old as a professor by the time he was appointed the VC of NAU.
Another funny condition is the total exclusion of virtually all Professors of medicine as the conditions of service as at today rates consultant equivalent to PhD, hence virtually none of the experienced professors in the field of medicine has a PhD as it was not a requirement for Professorship. There is no way you will change the rules midway. If it must be done, a grace period of at least 6years and the law should be obeyed with no issue of years of professorship attached.
c. Imposition of contestants from outside NAU: This is much of the talked about as the manner and way the adverts for Registrar and Vice Chancellor were harshly and negatively contrived speak uncharitable and disdainful volumes. On the lips of most contestants is about an unpopular candidate, who is not yet a professor at NAU being allegedly being sponsored and promoted by the external forces and with a questionable curriculum vitae that will be forced down the throats of all the Governing council members to swallow the bitter pill. What a pity?
d. War of words among the NAU Professors: It may surprise the reader that these leprous conditions for the position of Vice Chancellor have generated so much bad-blood among the lecturers. It is feared that people on the various sides of the divide may find it difficult to unite again given the level of bitterness so far generated among the populace. This is quite unhealthy for the university community where peace and tranquility is an absolute desideratum for learning and research to thrive.
It appears that the centre can no longer hold as total anarchy has been let loose to the extent that the selection /appointment of new vice chancellor (VC) to succeed the outgone Vice Chancellor (Prof. Charles Esimone) has torn and is still tearing the university apart to the extent that peaceful condition for research and learning appear quite elusive.
In conclusion, it is expected that the aberration caused by these anomalies must be removed and the burden falls on the internal university Governing council members to drive the process. Let us face the fact that NAU has started the journey into the academic abyss through sliding a downward slope of no return. It must be stopped if NAU is expected to honestly (not by propaganda) take its prized position among the committee of Nigerian, African and world universities.
