On appointment of acting Vice Chancellor by 10th governing council of Nnamdi Azikiwe University

Nnamdi Azikiwe University has been in the news for the past two days over the appointment of Prof. Carol Arinze-Umobi as the Acting Vice Chancellor pending the appointment of a substantive VC.

There have been accusations and counter accusations by different people with different shades of interest. A lot of conjectures have been made and political motives adduced. These are conjectures, some of which lack any logical inference. Some are laughable.

At the expiration of the tenure of the 5th Substantive VC, the NUC gave out a circular specifying how transition of power should go in the absence of Council. It specifically requested Senate to nominate one of the DVCs to oversee the office of the VC until Council is constituted. The circular made it clear that the power to appoint the Acting VC lies with the Council.

It happened that as at 4th June when the tenure of Prof Esimone expired, the only DVC was Prof Joseph Ikechebelu. His candidature was not debated at the Senate of 4th June 2024 since there were no options available to Senators to make a choice.

Prof Ikechebelu had acted as the VC of Unizik on several occasions during the periods that the Substantive was away. Personally, I do not see the difference between his acting during those periods and his acting after the expiration of Prof Esimone’s tenure.

I was actually surprise when he assumed the posture of an ‘appointed’ Acting Vice Chancellor by his actions and deeds. It was an effrontery on the authority that was given the power to appoint.

When Council arrived, they requested for 2 candidates according to their set out criteria which they are empowered by law to do.

Let me digress a little to analyze the criteria given by Council

1. Deputy Vice Chancellor: to ensure that the candidate has enough experience to handle the management of the University.
2. 66 – 70 years to ensure that the person is not qualified to vie for substantive (age limit for substantive is 65)

Coincidentally only 2 candidates met the criteria which left Senators with no options to make. Since there were not more than 2 persons that met the criteria, there was no need for nomination or voting or even deliberation on the matter. Assuming they were more than 2 , Senate will need to meet, deliberate and nominate 2 out ot the qualified persons.

Council directed the Acting Registrar to inform Senators to meet before 20 July, 2024 to nominate 2 former DVCs for consideration. The letter was made public. The Acting Registrar for reasons best known to him refused to obey Council directive.

To avert a crisis, some concerned Professors of the University organized themselves and met and wrote Council, supplying them with the information they need (names of the only 2 DVCs who incidentally are above 65).

The most important thing is that the names of the only 2 candidates got to Council and they chose one out of the 2.

Unless we are saying that it is Senate that has the power to set the criteria and force Council to accept candidates based on their own criteria. I am not sure the law gives Senate such power that overrides the power of Council. Even if Senate meets on this matter 20 times, the same candidates will emerge because there are no variables or options to make. Unless it is proven that Senate has the authority to set the criteria which Council must accept. Which if that is the case, Council’s power to appoint has been unsurped. A body that has the power to appoint has the power to reject or accept a recommendation from the recommending body (Senate). The request to Senate to nominate 2 persons that met their criteria is based on the assumption that there may be more than 2 persons that may meet the criteria. Just as there was only one DVC to oversee the office of the VC before the coming of Council, there were only two candidates that met the criteria set by Council. There ought not be any controversy at all.

I am not sure anyone has ever challenged any University Council for setting the number of years as a Professor as one of the criteria for appointing a VC. Who says they have no such powers to set criteria for the appointment of an Acting?

The Council in their own wisdom set the criteria that exclude any person qualified to vie for the substantive VC position from taking up the Acting Position. For me, their approach is logical and just. It provides a level playing ground for all contestants. Personally, I have no interest in who emerges the substantive VC. Apart from Prof Ikechebelu, I don’t know who else is interested in contesting. He has very good chances of emerging as the 6th Substantive VC of Unizik. However, when the call for application is advertised, we will know others those who are interested. Who says I won’t be interested if I meet the advertised qualifications?

Prof. Greg Obiamalu is the immediate past Dean, Faculty of Arts, Unizik