Ahmadu Bello University Charting A New Course

Ahmadu Bello University Charting A New Course, But On Slippery Grounds

Usman, Sule Machika

It is no more news that Ahmadu Bello University have been without a substantive Vice-Chancellor since May 23rd, 2009, two hundred and twenty five days, thirty three weeks, nine months ago. Neither is it news that from onset, everything went wrong in the former process. The tenure of those saddled with the responsibility of helping appoint a substantive VC had expired, there were a number of court cases banning congress assembling, and the proceeding student unrest left a lot of mudslinging on many people and at various directions.

Sadly, many people, particularly those who felt aggrieved with the last administration, cash-in on the disarray of the usual traditional focus of the ivory tower of not allowing sentiments in handling issues. Powershift was the last straw that almost pulled the great university to its very foundation. That ugly word that is the bane of Nigerian politics crawl gradually creping into Ahmadu Bello University. Powershift has never been known in the politics of the ivory tower. In fact, even the word ‘transition’ had been rejected by scholars of politics of the ivory tower. The appointment of a Vice-Chancellor had always been seen as a mere ‘baton exchange’ in the university. Merit in qualifications, conduct and experience had always been the major instrument in such matters until lately, with the last exercise going to the extreme. Some people in the last exercise were feeling bigger than the university and as such should decide who gets appointed or not as the substantive VC without following the tradition of eschewing mediocrity, sentiments and partiality in such matters. Where their whims and caprices were not successful, they shamelessly smuggled in the larger Nigerian politics of threats, intimidation, blackmail, godfatherism and ethno-religious sentiments. What a shame!

It is indeed pathetic that members of the ivory tower would lack the patriotic shame and the sense of national pride in the conduct of university affairs and degenerate to indulge in politics of corruption, nepotism, religious bigotry, and ethnic sentiments in the appointment of a Vice-Chancellor for the university. In the long analysis, it is not only sad for the university, but indeed pathetic for the nation at large. A one time Vice-Chancellor of the university, Prof. Ango Abdullahi, Magajin Rafin Zazzau, Hakimin Yakawada, succinctly captured this years ago when he posited that

“No doubt, corruption has eaten deep into the fabric of Nigerian society, so much so, that I believe it is at present one of the greatest obstacles to national development. It will not be an easy task….to give a comprehensive package of solutions to the corruption canker-worm in Nigeria today. It is my view however, that a start must be made somewhere, and that somewhere must be the universities. It is our primary function in the universities not only to teach the truth but also to discover new frontiers for the truths through research. What I am saying essentially is that it is in the universities that the high level manpower for the effective and efficient running of the nation is produced. If this product is moulded and fashioned on the basis of truth, then half the battle could have been won against corruption and corrupt practices in Nigeria. If however, for whatever reasons, we, who are responsible for teaching our students the truth, based on researched truth, fail in this sacred duty, then we must see ourselves as the major contributors to the malaise of corruption in the country” (emphasis, mine).

If anything is to go by the politicking of the university in the last nine months, as a sample of what to expect in the larger society, 2011 would be another challenging period in the history of Nigeria. There is no two ways about it; the dons have not only failed the university community, but certainly all Nigerians.

From the very beginning, I decried the scoring system of the Selection Committee, I also decried the stands of “if we cannot get it, no one should”, as well decried the ethno-religious ‘shout and cry’ politicking brought into the university. Those who were supposed to “teach” the Chairman of Council to uphold the university tradition, failed in their “sacred duty”, due to either ‘self righteousness, self centeredness or both’ without any responsibility conscience in that failure, are today self acclaimed “saviours of the University”, how amazing? Amazingly, while they were quick in lavishing criticism on the process, the former Pro-Chancellor and other personalities, they lack the shock absorber to tolerate similar criticism level against them and on the process by others. They know not “do onto other, as you want others to do onto you!” afterall, criticism is a homing pigeon.

Well barely one month after a new Chairman of Council took over, they are at it again! Afterall, a leopard never changes it spots. Certainly, with the appointment of a new Chairman of Council, Ambassador (Engr) Bunu Sherif Musa, the University is charting a new course. But with the antics of “University King Makers”, it is already established that the new Chairman of Council is once again steering the university into slippery grounds. The new Chairman of Council must be alerted in good time to avoid steering the university into an abyss. It is quite true that the politics of Ahmadu Bello University in the last nine months is not new to the Chairman, having been an active participant throughout the period. It is also true that the Council Chairman is one of the prides of the University having risen to the position of the University Alumni President. It is also a fact that he is also versed in both local and national politics of the nation, having been a Federal Minister on two occasions, therefore well connected to the national power brokers in Nigeria. His record as a member of the University Council was also known to be steadfast in the pursuit of the university set goals. He has also consolidated the University Alumni Association nationwide. Credible credentials for the Pro-Chancellor and Chairman University Governing Council. The most outstanding of all, one cannot help but to commend the Engineer turned Ambassador’s courage for accepting the appointment when the university is undoubtedly on trouble waters. Yes incredible credentials, yet these alone cannot guarantee successfully steering a great university like A.B.U. which unfortunately is presently plunged into a quagmire to safer grounds.

Many who have been tired of the imported mudslinging in the university politics have been praying for the new Chairman of Council to start on a sound footing. Sadly, it was not to be. He has already committed the most elementary mistakes a proud car driver often commits. Such confidence might emanate from believing in self or in the car, both of which might be dangerous. In this case, the radiator water was not checked, nor was the engine oil gauged. The tires of the car were also not inspected and apparently, the driver may not be sure of the quantity of fuel in the car, since he cannot be too sure that the fuel meter is functioning properly. Although the Pro-Chancellor is sure of his desired destination, he did not make the best use of the compass at hand, particularly if he wanted to avoid the path his predecessor trod. These are the basics over looked by the new Council Chairman, basics that are too dangerous to ignore and basics that can be catastrophic to the university governance in the months to come.

Let us interpret them one at a time. In some lights, the new Chairman of Council would be said to have started better than how his predecessor got into A.B.U. in terms of political infrastructure on ground. While his predecessor met an expired members of Boards and Committees and various court injunctions, this obstacles were cleared at his assumption of office. He is equally much better in that he had been a Member of Council for the past three (3) or more years. It therefore would not be wrong to say that he knows the politics of the university better than his predecessor. Much is therefore expected of him. But unfortunately, the ship of the university in his hands is presently on slippery grounds. We wait to see if it would come unstuck while moving it onto firm ground.

One would have expected that the Pro-Chancellor first and foremost would itemise the problems, real or imagine that polarise the university in the selection process that finally brought him to his present position. In his ‘message of hope and change’, the title of his address to the University Senate, the Pro-Chancellor made the understatement of the year 2009, by saying that ‘religion is and should never be an issue at ABU’. Nothing can be far from the truth! It is common knowledge that the Christian Forum’s stand is to pronounce Prof. Nok as the Vice-Chancellor, while the Muslim forum wants everything started afresh. It is also common knowledge that the Christians are apprehensive of the proliferation of mosques both in the offices and residential areas. There were also complaints on sensitive issues of appointments and admissions. In a similar fate, the Muslims are worried over certain imbalances in the composition of staff in some departments, the case of the Commercial Law Department were all the lecturer are Christian is often sited. All these cannot be brushed with a wave of the hand or pretend that they do not exist. For anybody to succeed in defusing the real or imaginary problems religious divide played in the current selection process impasse, he must first of all accept these problems whether real or imagined and tackle them head-on.

Indeed this is one of the major problems the selection process faced and would continue to face if not adequately handled. The second problem the Pro-Chancellor should be bold to accept is the scoring of the VC contenders. An unambiguous marking scheme should be agreed and adopted. A scoring system that can speak for itself even by a layman and not be subjected into various subjective interpretations at different levels, a scoring system that would depict transparency, accuracy and fairness to all should be used. He cannot also overlook the allegations levelled against the University Registrar for circumventing Council decisions while (mis)guiding and (mis)leading the former Pro-Chancellor. In other words, there is distrust in the activities of the Secretariat under the leadership of the Registrar. By extension the entire University Management is suspect, depending on which divide one finds himself.

There is also the problem of the person of the new Pro-Chancellor himself. As expected of any normal member of a body entrusted to take decisions, except for a bench warmer, the Ambassador was known to lean on specific divides as a member of Council. He was also known to oppose some certain views and individuals. This means that his views were aligned to some people while opposing some people (pro and anti) when he was an ordinary member of Council. Well the drumbeats have changed, so also should the dance. In his present capacity, the Chairman of Council must be seen to assume neutrality his present station commands. This on its own is a problem that could hinder the Pro-Chancellor’s success if not handled well. The last problem, still on the person of the Pro-Chancellor, which ought to be handled with urgency as a matter of priority, is his appointment as the Pro-Chancellor. This must be made transparently a public knowledge, as it bothers on credibility to exert the necessary authority of that office. This is simply because his appointment came at a time when the President seemingly was out of the country. The Pro-Chancellor did not enjoy the traditional Presidential inauguration. This casts a lot of doubt to the authority needed to muscle past the present impasse in the university.

If, according to the Chairman of Council that his leadership “will provide decisive and prompt decision making process to all issues at the Council; due process will be followed in all cases such that at the end of any exercise, there will be transparency and acceptability in the outcome, which will stand the test of time”, then these issues should have been address first even before facing the University Senate.

If actually the Pro-Chancellor really wants to carry everybody along, in a polarised university, were one section of the community lost faith in the Management, the Chairman of Council had already taken a false step by adopting the Road Mad drawn by that Management. Similarly, knowing fully one section of the religious divide had gone to the press and made public the demand to cancel the entire process to start afresh and on assumption, the new Pro-Chancellor stood by that is another false step. As expected, the Christians and Nok supporters are already on their toes, waiting for the confirmation that a war is waged against them if the process is to be started afresh. In fact, what does the Pro-Chancellor intend to achieve by re-advertising the process? In simple analogy, does one forecast the disaster the university would be thrown into if one or two of the eight contenders are not in the final selection? Does anybody also took into cognizance of what would happen if the three top contenders are not in the last three in the case of another wild goose chase? Or is it just for the sake of re-advertising, to squander the university’s meagre fund? Or is the money for the re-advertisement coming from the personal pocket of the Pro-Chancellor and the Registrar?

As a member of the former Council, the Pro-Chancellor ought to come out clearly to inform the University Community the crime(s) the eight contenders for the VC committed to have attracted his nullification. This is actually steering the university into slippery grounds. The new Council Chairman should be told that this would be throwing the university into more troubles than he actually inherited. He ought to know that what happened between Dr Kabir Chafe and Malam Adamu Ciroma, no matter the extreme, is an in-house thing. It is a brother to a brother kind of thing. I personally would not be surprise that as of the time of putting this piece together, Kabir Chafe and Adamu Ciroma have buried the hatchet. They are both Muslims, both Fulanis, who knows, they could even have a common ancestral lineage. That problem was, contrary to many, a minor case that does not need even an Emir’s intervention not to talk of the Sultanate wading into the matter in the tradition of the Mujjadadi Dan Fodio Empire.

But where the present Council Chairman is directing the ship of the university is a different ball game, it is catastrophic! In the words of Dr Kabir Chafe, the Council Chairman should be aware that “when Zaria sneezes the rest of Nigeria can catch cold”. There is indeed no need to plunge the university in a religious crisis. I was particular happy the line the election of the Acting Vice-Chancellor towed, not because I have anything against Prof. Omoh or have anything special for Prof. Aliyu Mohammed, but because the new Acting VC had more of the Christians Votes in winning that election. That goes for many positions contested. It thus meant that the politics of the ivory tower is going back to its tradition of merit, devoid of sentiments. Please, do not take us back to those sad, ugly days of religious polarisation.

What the new Pro-Chancellor needed in ‘searching for ways and means of overcoming the current impasse’, if I may quote him, is wide consultations across all divides. The Pro-Chancellor ought to assert his transparent, unbiased and impartial stand in his dealings as the ‘father’ of all now that he is the Pro-Chancellor. His first seating should have been with the eight contenders to chart the way forward for the university. Should they have arrived at a consensus to re-advertise the process that would have been the most appropriate. There is also an eminent need for the Pro-Chancellor to meet with the two religious interest groups (not necessary Teaching and Research staff turned Clergymen and Imams) to alleviate their various fears, real or imagined. The two bodies too could reach a general acceptable compromise that every God fearing soul in the university could abide with, if a thorough job is done. All these could have taken place in a week. The Pro-Chancellor should then have been armed with Road Map as an outcome of the consultations before facing the University Senate with a tentative Time-Table for appointing a substantive VC for the university. As a result of this failure, this is were the Federal Government actually need to come in as they did in the case of University of Benin, where the new Pro-Chancellor was given six weeks to produce a substantive VC, (see the Daily Sun of October 21, page 6).

Ambassador (Engr) Bunu Sherif Musa has all it takes to make a difference but he must be seen by all as a man above board, not to give room as one who is (mis)guided by any interest group. This is because there is already a rumour going round the university that the Management the Pro-Chancellor is depending heavily upon, met without the University Librarian and the Bursar in attendance to scuttle the Council meeting scheduled to take place on the 14the January 2010. The aim is to keep derailing the process of appointing a substantive VC in order to frustrate some contenders for the post, while nurturing one or two of their candidate to better standing in the future race. Moreso, in their own words, “afterall the university is now in our hands”.

There is no iota of doubt that with the appointment of a new Pro-Chancellor and Chariman of Council, re-constituted Council Committees and Boards, (although not yet ratified and inaugurated), Ahmadu Bello University is charting a new course. What is left is to ensure that the Pilot of the university ship steers it clear, off murky and slippery grounds. The public eye is on you!

Usman, Sule Machika, wrote from Zaria.