June 25, 2022


Official Website Of Union Of Campus Journalits, University of Ilorin.

Unilorin Sub-Dean: “UISEC commissioners this year were mischievous, Porous and came with interests”

7 min read

*Unilorin’18 Aftermath: “UISEC commissioners this year were mischievous, Porous and came with interests” – Sub Dean*

The Sub Dean of the Students Affairs Unit, Dr Alex Akanmu has lashed out at the members of the Unilorin Independent Students Electoral Commission (UISEC), over what he termed “unprofessional” roles they played in the just concluded Students’ Union elections.
The aftermath of the election that saw the emergency of a medical student as the President-elect has brewed series of polemics from different angles suggesting that conspiracy was played out by the University’s Students’ Affairs Unit, specifically, the Sub Dean.

Expectedly, Sub Dean, in the turn of events, cleared the air over some grey areas of allegations. In his response, he alleged that the UISEC officials that conducted the election lacked in the required ‘Intellectual’ capability in holding public trusts; describing them as “porous”, “mischievous” “inconsistent” and that they had come with “conflicting vested interests”

The Sub Dean who earlier declined comments over the saga eventually poured out his mind saying: “I don’t want to talk about the ISEC we have this year because they all came with interests and it override their objectivity and sense of thinking such that you also wonder the porosity of the ISEC so that when you have meeting with them like this, most time you have to say half truth to them because you know everything will be on air. So when they come back here, they look shameful because only the half is already in the public. And you shake your head and say these are the people you deal with…they don’t even know how to handle information.”

He also alleged that some of the constituted members of the commission were out for hatchman job; opining that ISEC was a house divided against itself. he decried the unbalanced nature of the commission’s treatment of the vying candidates. Most specifically, the President-elect. He lamented the commission’s poor administrative prowess, saying that this year’s ISEC “was a divided and unprofessional ISEC ever brought”

Reacting to the issue of disqualifying some of the candidates in the race, Dr Alex alluded to a similar event in the past where one Alagbede was made to leave the race at the eve of the election. According to him “in the time past they had the way of  driving away one to two candidates and for those who are old enough in this campus, who have spent about three to four year would recall Alagbede saga…it was in the day of debate that he was disqualified. Not on the basis of CGPA…”, he alluded.

Dr Alex further bemoaned the unprofessional way the issue of candidates’ eligibility was handled, he alleged conspiracy in the way the electoral empire treated Animasaun’s case. In his words: “Many of them were literally against the President-elect and it was clear in their operations, it was very glaring. And they were not armed with fact. When they were constituted, (let me start with the word) I was fully aware that they were handed over the constitution, the compendium…and because I like speaking with facts…when they were constituted I think it’s on a Saturday June 23rd or so; they had the privilege of this constitution; this compendium with the President’s signature but because some of them were mischievous, they could not circulate it among themselves; it was kept with the chairman and some members of the committee, and of course, ISEC, some of them were out for hatchman job.”, Sub Dean said.

On the purported reasons for the rumoured resignation, Dr Alex suspected that the commissioners could not have opted for resignation if the President-elect had not been part of the presidential race. He said they earlier disqualified him because they could not harness fact; their action was based on the half truth at their disposal and that happened because they wanted to look good to some vested interests. “This is what they advertised. Meanwhile to look good to the interest they’re representing, they keep telling them ‘It’s 60 percent’; ‘We’ll screen him out'”; he continued: “We were waiting… we went to the academic office, they gave us reports of academic status of all the aspirants and duly signed by the academic office”, he said.

Sub Dean further revealed that a letter from the faculty of Basic medical science, came, and to which as a staff of the University he must attend; According to the content of the letter which was made available to the press “The grading of MBBS is not classified but based on percentage. The average score of the candidate (Animasaun) as of his last professional exam, April 2018 is 53.5. The conduct of the resit exam is statutory in the MBB programme in the college of health sciences and its result cancels whatever score candidate had previously”, the letter reads in part.

He alleged ISEC members, in their interests had gone extra mile in a bid to ensure Animasaun did not join the race. He said they advertised what was not true and “So when it appears that the boy they were fighting…THEY HAVE THEIR INTERESTS… because they wanted to edge him out, they have gone all around to get documents about him. Those documents were on those when he failed pathology and he had a resit. As at the time he failed pathology, his point was 51.8%”

However, with the new development, he alleged that the injunction infuriated them but “since unlike our own classified degree. If you have a resit in medicine, it cancels whatever score you have already  because they have to record the new score for you to continue. So the data in their disposal which they want to use against their enemy is the data of 51.8 and they circulated it in the camp they’re representing and they don’t have these facts. So when they came, we said the boy will contest; you’re not the ones that will award degree, it’s the university; the college has written and tells you that ‘that automatically cancels whatever score’, the Sub Dean become their enemy at that time..” And a number of ISEC commissioners ” became angry;  three of them went online that they’ve resigned. Not that they wanted to resign because of the injunction, but because the candidate they did not like is coming”, he alleged.

“You advertised 52.5 he had 53.5, is he not qualified? We don’t take resit here, we take carryover here… In medicine, they have another way of classifying their degree, if you have a resit, the score you have automatically cancels whatever point you had before…they were circulating the old points in their caucus; because each time we meet, they’ll have to go and feed whoever sponsors them.”

“So when this boy was to be out of the race, they agreed in a meeting that because he’s going to be out, to now give their own candidate chance, that Ashnof and Standard are not meeting up with the knowledge of the union, they should be out, that time there should be no noise. So by that it’ll be narrowed down to five (contenders) – Scofied, Oye, Mayaiki, Carson and one other person – Carson is not a threat to them, so it will be among the three – Scofied, Mayaiki and Aristotle – and Aristotle is not even a threat to them. So the argument was to edge Standard and Ashnof out because they were in the category of Alagbede memory. So if the two be out, no problem. So they already circulated the news that have not been officially appended to in their clique so they were already jubilating – ‘Atleast it’s going to be among just five. You see now? So when the results with them have ‘NOT CLEARED’ for Animasahun, ‘NOT CLEARED’ for Ashnof, ‘NOT CLEARED’ for Standard, there was no noise, but immediately the letter came, I said there’s a letter I must respect as a staff of the University, here is the document, they became angry.”

“These same people agreed that Ashnof should leave the race; that Standard should leave the race because aside CGPA, that there’s no knowledge of the union and their confidence was in doubt…so they went on social media, and the question I asked: ‘Were you appointed on social media?’, ‘what exactly were you trying to gain from social media?’ public sympathy? Because of inconsistencies, you claimed you resigned and you appeared the following morning to beg. So when they claimed they resigned, I did not talk, as long as I have fact, I was just looking at them. Ok no problem. So they went on air…many of you reading things, you don’t know forces behind those things, the forces behind are from town. I was not Sub Dean last year, we never released screening results on social media – it’s always pasted. And it’s always around 11.30 or 11pm. Because of the political heat they wanted to heat up, they released results on social media. And the one they released on social media was: ‘Animasahun NOT QUALIFIED’; ‘Ashnof NOT CLEARED’. Who would recon with the results that was not pasted? So those three released the results because they had computer with them. And as at the time there was a divide, the chairman was having access to fact. The university would not released the results on social media; these people were cleared…infact with those ones you people claimed to not having competency, we cleared everybody and released the results at the normal time. Screening results used to be released between 10 and 11pm not on social media! I’m not a social media scholar. As far as I’m concerned, I believe in documentation”

Dr Alex, however cautioned that “every society where people resist orders, there won’t be standard. What I have to say is that people are resisting standard or quality as it were, because that’s what was obtainable in the past.”

_Reported by pressmen Abdullahi R. Adetutu, Ojebode S. Tomi, Iwayemi Zainab, Ayeyemi Deborah; and the pack ably led by Fadlullah Abdul-Azeez._


Copyright © All rights reserved. Developed by Ssu-Technology Limited | Newsphere by AF themes.