Gbenro Adesina
One of the contestants in the recently conducted 2020-2025 Senate Representatives on the joint Council/Senate Joint Selection Board for the appointment of the 13th Vice Chancellor of the University of Ibadan (UI), Professor Mojeed Kolawole Akinsola of the Department of Arts and Social Sciences Education, have dissociated himself from petitions written against the conduct and result of the election.
In a letter addressed to the Chairman, Governor Council and dated September 26, 2020, Akinsola noted that the petitions were baseless and aimed at truncating a transparent process adding, “As a participant in the election, all the issues raised by the two petitioners are non-issues as far as the credibility of the entire election process is concerned”.
It would be recalled that Professor Ademola Omobewaji Dasylva of the Department of English, Faculty of Arts and Professor Adesoji Adedipe Fasanmade, Department of Physiology, College of Medicine, in separate petitions to Nde Joshua Mutka Waklek, the Chairman, University of Ibadan Governing Council, called for the nullification of the election and its result, which produced Professor Peter Olamakinde Olapegba of the Department of Psychology and his colleague in the Department of Mathematics, Professor Ezekiel Olusola Ayoola, as winners.
Dasylva, scored 94 and Fasanmade scored 77, out of 604 votes cast.
Dasylva, in his petition alleged that the process of the election lacked transparency and was technically compromised, stressing that the process was fraught with procedural improprieties, certain technicalities and flagrant contraventions of electoral processes.
Calling for the cancellation of the election and its results, he asserted that the conduct of a fresh election into the Senate Joint Selection Board would protect the integrity of the appointment of the 13th Vice Chancellor of the Premier University.
In the same vein, Fasanmade cited six reasons why the election should be cancelled, asking the Governing Council to set up a committee to investigate the electoral process used in this election.
Among his grouses are conference voting in some offices on campus, failure to display the list of accredited voters, failure to display the list of candidates along with their sponsors and supporters confirmed as validly nominated for scrutiny and records of Senate Members/entire University at any time before the elections, and disenfranchisement of some senate members from voting to ‘illegal’ conference voting.
He added, “The distribution of the votes in the final result released does not follow the binomial distribution expected of ‘free and fair’ elections. My ‘end-of-voting poll’ suggests that I should have received more than the number of votes ‘allotted’ to me”.
However, Akinsola faulted all the allegations raised by the two petitioners, saying, “I can vouch for the integrity of the Joint Council/Senate Selection Board election and I believe as academics, we should be above board and not play politics of destruction as seen in the larger society”.
He noted that apart from the facts that the petitions against the election were based on falsehood and hearsay, they were meant to outrightly blackmail the University adding, “I will therefore not support the cancellation of the election”.
Akinsola said, “Ordinarily, I wouldn’t have bordered myself with a reaction, but for the fact that my name was mentioned in the said petition to you without my knowledge and it would appear as if one is in support of the contents stated therein. The petitioner stated that “This objection stems from our conviction that the election was technically compromised——-“. There are nine (9) of us who contested the election and the petition was signed by only one person. I do not know where the “our” is coming from”.
“On the issue of no record of valid nomination, a meeting was held at the Senate Chamber on Friday 18th of September, 2020 at 4.00pm where all the nine (9) contestants were present. The issue of those who proposed and seconded our nomination was raised. We (all the nine contestants), agreed without any dissenter, that we should proceed with the election. The Registrar did apologize but there was no decision as to whether the names of the proposer and “seconder” be published before Monday-the day of the election. Integrity demands that we abide with the decision we all subscribed to and this should not be one of the items in the petition”, he added.
“The second issue mentioned by the petitioner is that: it is apparent that the platform for the e-voting was compromised and manipulated. This to me is not an issue and cannot be true. The second window as pointed out by the petitioner is not supposed to be open to anyone until the end of voting. If people had access to it, what result would then be announced once it’s already known? This does not compromise the process in anyway. Besides, each of the contestants had representatives present at the server room alongside the electoral officer, none of who raised any issue at the meeting where result was declared. While not holding brief for the technical committee, the so called “freeze” is not unusual when dealing with Computer applications. To the best of my knowledge, only one result was officially declared for me, which was 20 votes. I saw the result of 50 votes for me on social media platform which I believe is not the official platform for the release of result. I do not doubt the authenticity of the official result. At any rate, petitioner was physically present at the venue of the Senate meeting to declare the result and he never made any attempt to raise any objection or observation. Writing a petition days after to me is an afterthought and attempt to bring the University name and the Senate to disrepute and using the Council as an ambush to truncate a transparent process.”, he stressed.
He stated further, “The third issue raised by the petitioner concerns the email sent to all Senate members by a faceless group that tag itself “Gasikiya Group” through the email of -Gaskiya Gamji on the 11th of September 26, 2020 detailing how some group within the university are rooting for the pair of Prof E. O. Ayoola and Prof. P. O. Olagbegba to be their representatives at the Joint Council/Senate Selection Board for the appointment of the Vice Chancellor. The email was released 11 clear days before voting. In other words, if all members of Senate are aware about these people antecedent, eleven days before voting and still chose to vote for them, so be it. It’s each member’s inalienable right to vote for whoever they feel can represent their best interest. No one has a right to dictate to them who to vote for and that exactly was in my reckoning what happened on the day of the election”.
Clarifying issues, he said, “On the issue of voting in Prof Deji Omoles’ office, he is well and alive and I believe is capable of defending himself. However, I was expecting the petitioner to have mentioned at least one of the Senate members that supposedly voted in Prof. Deji Omole’s office; otherwise the accusation could be termed hearsay or outright blackmail. If we are sure of our facts it should be laid in the open. No doubt the stake is high, so those who have information should come to the open and present it”.
He said, “On the issue of eligible members of Senate raise by another petitioner, the Senate office sent an email to all HODs’ and relevant organs of the university to update it with relevant information which led to the final updated versions sent to all Senators on the 6th of September, 2020”.
“On the meeting of 18th September earlier mentioned above, the head of the technical crew, Prof. Ogunjuyigbe stated that a total of 640 Senators were accredited for the election and none raised any issue concerning it. Going by the results, 604 voted in the election, representing 94.375 per cent who voted, meaning that only 36 eligible voters did not participate in the election, and one cannot ascertain what prevented the 36 from voting”, he pointed out.
Comments 1