I read with a chuckle an article written by one Tunde S. Kwairanga, bearing the above title, published in the Daily Nigerian on Monday 21st April 2025. Ordinarily, such articles, characterised by bitterness, veiled anger, and unrelenting frustration, should not warrant a response. But because of the falsehoods, distortions, and misrepresentations littering the piece, and clearly intended to cast aspersion on the current leadership of the University of Abuja, renamed Yakubu Gowon University by presidential pronouncement, I find it imperative to offer a personal response. My interest as a public commentator committed to the commendable steps President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has taken to redeem the image of our tertiary institutions over the past few months compels me to engage with the article.
To begin with, it was crystal clear that the crisis situation in the University of Abuja, before the decisive intervention of the Visitor, His Excellency President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, had dangerously steered the institution toward the edge of an avoidable precipice. The media was awash with reports of internal infractions and looming anarchy, many of them raised by concerned professors and well-meaning stakeholders. The appointment process of the former Vice-Chancellor, Professor Aishat Sani Meikudi, by the now-dissolved Council had created a deeply fractious environment, one the President, as a right-thinking leader, and Visitor to the University, could not permit to persist unchecked. His intervention, by dissolving the Council and relieving the former Vice-Chancellor of her position, paved the way for the appointments of Dr. Olanrewaju Tejuoso as Council Chairman and Professor Patricia Lar as Acting Vice-Chancellor.
Of course, both individuals are seasoned administrators and respected educationists. Tejuoso’s appointment by the President makes it his third time in a similar capacity—having served as the pro-chancellor/chairman, Governing Council of the University of Lagos and Joseph Sarwuan Tarka University (formerly University of Agriculture, Makurdi Benue State), while Lar, an erudite professor of medical microbiology, comes with her wealth of academic and administrative experience as well as innovative touches.
Together, these leading lights of the institution, who came from outside, rather than inside, are more than equipped to lead the University out of its current woods. In such a polarised and tension-laden atmosphere, this was the only legitimate and responsible path forward. Of course, Tejuoso and Lar were not crisis instigators; they are agents of restoration.
It is, therefore, both laughable and unfortunate for the writer to describe this well-considered presidential move as an “imposition.” Indeed, the law makes provision for such emergency interventions, and the Council Chairman and Acting Vice Chancellor are simply fulfilling a duty to stabilise and reposition the University.
In carrying out their mandate, the two leaders had to hit the ground running. The acting vice-chancellor, Professor Lar, particularly has no much time — six months— and so her first task was to embark on visits to all faculties of the university to understand the grievances and aspirations of the staff she met on ground. A number of the decisions that were taken by her now stemmed from such widespread interactions which revealed mountain of complaints and petitions from within the same university, ranging from allegations that many individuals—lacking in the requisite experience—had been appointed to strategic leadership positions ostensibly on the basis of closeness to power, stagnation in staff promotion, as well as non payment of their salaries.
Also, in many of the units and directorates, the tenures of the heads and directors had since expired or were about expiring. The appointments of directors made so far by Professor Lar are thus justified and appropriate; and indeed, most of the appointees were professors of repute, who know much about the workings of the university system.
Similarly, the appointment of three senior special assistants to the acting vice chancellor is not a novelty. This practice exists in other universities, where comparable structures help leaders work efficiently. These appointments are not only legal but also necessary to ensure that bureaucratic bottlenecks do not frustrate genuine reform.
I come to another spurious insinuation: that the recent promotions of some academics to the professorial cadre “cannot be sustained” because “there is no Governing Council,” and are therefore “null and void.”
Knowing how easily the writer could be rightly construed as someone lacking a proper understanding of the system, he hastily begged “not to be seen as a harbinger of bad news.” Of course, he is—because those who have benefitted from the promotions, along with their friends and families, are excited and convinced they truly merited it. The truth is that the promotions had been duly processed and approved by the Pro-Chancellor and Council Chairman after favourable assessments were returned—long before the acting vice-chancellor announced them on the floor of Senate. The writer should have no fear about their validity; the promotions remain valid and legal. His claim that “the bulk of those who stoutly opposed the promotions approved last year by the Minister of Education at the behest of the President and Visitor to the University… are now keeping quiet” should tell him that the so-called scepticism to the present promotion exercise exists only in his imagination.
No doubt, any initiative that does not take into cognisance the base sentiments and interests of some individuals often received scepticism and criticism from those who feel sidelined. Some would have preferred that Professor Lar succumb to the pressure of indecision and timidity, allowing the quagmire she met on arrival to fester. But meaningful change, at all times, requires courage—and yes, a measure of exorcism.
Today, the difference is tangible. Senate meetings—both regular and extraordinary—as well as Congregation meetings, which were previously held under clouds of tension and apprehension, are now conducted in an atmosphere of camaraderie and calm. This improved ambience owes much to the broad leadership style and transparent vision of the Acting Vice-Chancellor. Her inclusive style such as ensuring the presence and participation of key officers like the Bursar, is part of the administrative shift towards greater accountability. None of these actions are illegal or iniquitous.
Professor Lar’s mission is clear, and she is executing it with admirable focus. Her mandate includes ensuring an open and transparent process that will culminate in the appointment of a substantive Vice-Chancellor.
At the moment, the University is still in a delicate transition, and I see that it is steadily returning to the path of stability and vision as outlined by the President. Though President Tinubu has not yet constituted the full Governing Council, this does not suggest that he has violated any law. Nor does it mean that those entrusted with the current leadership should fold their arms and allow the status quo to remain. They should be allowed to focus on their assignment and help the University rise above the setbacks that internal wranglings have caused to its growth.
Andrew Sempah writes from Akwanga, Nasarawa State.
