Wednesday, 19 June 2013
Ahead Of Ahmadu Bello University Golden Jubilee, Concerned Lecturers Allege Ongoing “Islamisation And Hausanisation” Of Institution
There is growing tension in Northern Nigeria’s premier institution, Ahmadu Bello University (ABU), which is preparing to celebrate its 50th anniversary, following allegations that the university is gradually being “Islamized and Hausanised” by its principal officers.
A Committee of Concerned Professors, along with students, alumni and other non-academic staff, has petitioned President Goodluck Jonathan about the development. The National Universities Commission is also said to have been alerted about many administrative anomalies in the university.
According to a source within the Presidency who is knowledgeable about the petition received by President Goodluck Jonathan on the issues brewing at ABU, the allegations also include flagrant abuse of the court judgment concerning the return of some members of the university’s Senate who had been arbitrarily sacked.
One accusation against the Vice Chancellor, Prof. Abdullahi Mustapha, involves employment of incompetent lecturers and administrative staff, including Third Class products being hired as Graduates Assistants. He is also alleged to have flagrantly abused the institution’s existing regulations, and set up an all-Muslim Senate.
The Committee of Concerned Professors attached to the petition a judgment of the Federal High Court dated 12th October 12, 2009, as well as its letter to the Vice-Chancellor drawing his attention to it. The Vice Chancellor is alleged to have ignored it and gone ahead to organize illegal elections that returned all ABU members of Congregation to Council and Senate, as “Muslims’’.
The source also said that many competent lecturers have begun to abandon ABU to work in the new federal universities in other parts of the country.
Below is the list of the members, and attached copies of court judgment:
A. CONGREGATION TO COUNCIL 2012
1. Dr. M. N. Maiturare
CONGREGATION TO SENATE
B. FACULTY OF ADMINISTRATION (6)
1. Mal. Hassan Shehu
2. Hamza Yusuf
3. Mal. Musa Idrs
4. Dr. Mohammed Suleiman Hussain
5. Dr. Salisu Mamman
6. Dr. Ahmad Bello Dogarawa
C. FACULTY OF AGRICULTURE(6)
1. Muhammad Aminu Ahmad
2. Dr. Ahmed M. Falaki
3. Abdu Salisu Bakura
4. DrMusa Abdullahi Mahdi
5. Dr. Aisha A. Mukhtar
6. Ibrahim Ahmad
D. FACULTY OF ARTS (6)
1. Dr. Surakat Tajuddeen Y.
2. Aminu Saflyanu Mohammed
3. Dr.Umar Buratai lnuwa
4. Dr. Magaji Tsoho Yakawada
5. Muhammad Rabi’u lsah
6. Dr. Usman Ladan
E. FACULTY OF EDUCATION (7)
1 Dr. Mustapha Isa Qasim
2 Dr. Sani Sambo
3 Hussaini Ahmed
4 Dr. Bayero Haladu Isa
5 Dr. Okeh Benard
6 Dr. Chom Joseph Emmanuel
7 Aliyu A. Lemu
F. FACULTY OF ENGINEERING (6)
1 Dr. Ause Tever
2 Dr. Waziri S. M.
3 Dr. Suleiman Garba
4 Dr. Muhmmad Dauda
5 Dr. J. A. Mohammed
6 Dr. Bello Mukhtar
G. FACULTY OF ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN (6)
1 Umar Faruq Yaya
2 Dr. Mu’azu Muhammad Sani
3 Dr. Samaila Usman Dakyes
4 Dr. Ahmed Muhammad Datti
5 Ali Abdu
6 Khalil Ismail Mohammed
H. FACULTY OF LAW
1 Barr. Dalhatu Idris
2 Dr. Kabir Danladi
3 Barr. A.J. Suleiman
4 Barr. Shehu Abdullahi
5 Dr. Mohammed Bello Othman
6 Barr. Farida A. Kera
I. FACULTY OF MEDICINE.(7)
I Dr. H. Y. Maftama
2 Dr. Lawal Abdulmumin Ahmed
3 Dr. Yusuf Rashid
4 Dr. Ahmed Saad A.
5 Dr. Isa Muhammad Sani
6 Dr. Rabiu Abdulsalam Magaji
7. Dr. Saleh Mailafia Ibrahim
J. FACULTY OF PHARM SCIENCES (6)
1 Mal. Adamu Aminu Ambi
2 Mal. Sani Mohammed Bashir
3 Mohammed A. Zayyad
4 Dr. Musa Aminu
5 Abdulsamad Abdurrahman
6 Magaji Muhammed Garba
K. FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES (6)
I Dr. Aliyu Rafindadi Sanusi
2 Dr. Ismaila Shehu
3 Ibrahim Jimoh
4 BappaHabib Yahaya
5 Umar Tanko Abdullahi
6 Aliyu Yahaya
L. FACULTY OF SCIENCES (7)
I Aihaji Baraya Yakubu
2 Dr. Musa Ibrahim Jaro
3 Dr. SalIau Muhammad Sani
4 Dr. Abdullahi Danladi
5 Dr. Bashir Yusuf Abubakar
6 Dr. Sadiq Umar
7 Dr. Sallau Abdullahi Balarabe
M. FACULTY OF VETERINARY MEDICINE (6)
1 Dr.Garba Mohammed
2 Dr. JahunBalarabeMagaji
3 Dr. AdamuJibril
4 Dr. Mohammed Hadi Suleiman
5 Dr. Mohammed Musa Suleiman
6 Dr. BeIIo Muhammed
N. CENTRE FOR ENERGY RESEARCH AND TRAINING(2)
1 Engr. Iro Yusuf
2 Dr. Mati Abdullahi
O. CENTRE FOR ISLAMIC LEGAL STUDIES(2)
1. Abubakar Aliyu
2. Saad Abubakar
P. NAERLS (2)
1 Dr. M. K. Othman
2 Zubairu E. Omenesa
Q. INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION (2)
1 Dr. Ahmad Mansur
2 Dr. Haruna Muhammad
R. INSTITUTE OF AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH(2)
I Dr. Abdullahi lbnYahaya
2 Dr. Hamza Mani
1 Saka 0. Lamidi
2 Dr. Abdullahi Kolo Muhammad
ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON STUDENT DISCIPLINES
1 Mal. Keffi S.U.D.
2 Mal. BashirAbubakar
UNIVERSITY PRESS BOARD (2)
1 Mohammed Ibrahim Gamawa
2 Dr. Suleiman Karwal
UNIVERSITY LOAN COMMITTEE (2)
1 Mal. UmarAliyu
2 Mal. BashirAbubakar
STUDENT WELFARE BOARD (2)
1 Maimuna Aliyu Shika
2 Michael Obagaye
UNIVERSITY HEALTH SERVICE BOARD (2)
I Mal. Salisu H. Ibrahim
2 Prof. Kabir Sabitu
HOUSING ALLOCATION COMMITTEE- MAIN CAMPUS (2)
1. Lawal I. Saminu
1. Yusuf Ismail Abubakar
AREA C (1)
1. Engr. Ahmed Abubakar Rufa’i
AREA H (AVIATION SITE II) (1)
1 Suleiman ArabiAbdullahi
1 Iro Idris Katsina
STAFF NOT RESIDENT IN UNIVERSITY HOUSING (1)
1 Dr. MustaphaLiman
KONGO HOUSING ALLOCATION COMMITTEE
A. Faculty of dministratibn (1)
B. Faculty of Law(1)
1 Abubakar M Madaki
I Abdulkareem SuIeimar
D. Rep. of Institute Admin.(Admin., Staff School, Secretary, Clinic (1)
1 Dr. UsmanBala
E. FACULTY OF MEDICINE(I)
I Dr. A. A. Aliyu
7. DEMONSTRATION SECONDARY SCHOOL BOARD(2)
I Dr. Sale A. Ado
2 Mohammed Usman (Sani Action)
8. UNIVERSITY SECURITY COMMITTEE (5)
1 Dr. Maryam Aminu
2 Mohammed All
3 Dr. Tanko Yusuf
4 Dr. Abu-Abdussamad
21st November, 2011
The Vice – Chancellor,
Ahmadu Bello University
Ahmadu Bello University,
THE JUDGMENT IN SUIT NO. FHC/KD/CS192/2009 BETWEEN (1) DR A.A. AKUME, (2) PROFESSOR I.I. DAFWANG AND (3) PROFESSOR A.G. GARBA VS (I) ABU ZARIA (2) COUNCIL, ABU ZARIA (3) SENATE ABU ZARIA, (4) VICE-CHANCELLOR ABU ZARIA AND (5) REGISTRAR ABU ZARIA
The Plaintiffs in this case filed this suit at the Federal High Court Kaduna on 12th October 2009. In this suit the Plaintiffs were praying the Court for a declaratory reliefs of 4 years tenure as Internal Council members of the University. Governing Council; (the Plaintiffs have their root as Council members from either Senate and/or Congregation) with effect from 10th February 2009, when the former.Council led by Mallam Adamu Cirorna was inaugurated by the Federal Government.
Sir, it is pertinent to note that, the Plaintiffs were elected into the former Governing Council on 9th of August 2007.
The Hon. Judge delivered the Court judgment in this suit on 2iQctober 2011 (please see a copy attached) where the Court decided inter alia that:
(1) The term of the University Governing Council is for a period of 4 years, that is dependent upon the appointing authority. Thus in this judgment the Court held that the term/period Dr. A. A. Akume and Prof II. Dafwang were to serve in the then Council is for 4 years with effect from 9th August 2007.
The ratio behind this decision is that the University Senate as their appointing authority had not fixed/shorten the period for both of its representatives by way of regulations as in the case of Congregation elected representatives to the Council.
Thus, the Court decided in the case of Prof AG. Garba that, since his appointing body i.e. the Congregation had by its rules shorten the period for him to represent it in the Council to 2 years, therefore his tenure in the Council shall be for 2 years only with effect from 9th of August 2007.
This decision has raised a number of issues for the University Management to address viz:
(1) The need for the University Senate to incorporate in its rules of procedure the terms each of its representatives to various boards and bodies is to. serve.
(2) The status of those Senate representatives say in Council, who were in Senate by virtue of their appointments as Heads of Department, that were to serve for a period of 2 years only.
(3) The status of a Senate representative to Council that ceases to be a member of the Senate.
We consider these questions essential because, for example Prof. I.I. Dafwang ceased to be a staff of the University from when his appointment with the University was terminated, while Dr. A,A. Akume also ceased to be a member of the Senate from when he ceased to be the Head of Department.
In the light of these issues therefore, we wish to advise that:-
a) The University Management to as a matter of urgency recommend to the Senate to make a rule that shall determine the tenure of its elected representatives to various boards and committees (Council inclusive).
b) To appeal this arm of judgement, in view of similar claims by Prof. I.I. Dafwang in a suit NQ FHC/ABJ/CS!1 23/2010.
c) The need to resolve these issues because of the forthcoming Congregation and those serving Council members that were elected to represent Senate.
Sir, the above is for your consideration and further directives.
Barr. S.A Barau
University Legal & Liaison Services Officer
IN THE FEDERAL HIGH COURT OF NIGERIA
IN THE KADUNA JUDICIAL DIVISION
HOLDEN AT KADUNA
ON FRIDAY THE 21ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2011
BEFORE THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE M. L. SHUAIBU
SUITE NO. FHC/KD/CS/92/2009
1. DR. A. A AKUME
2. PROFESSOR I. I. DAFWANG PLAINTIFFS
3. PROFESSOR A. G. GARBA
1. AHMADU BELl 0. UNIVERSITY, ZARIA
2. COUNCIL, AHMADU BELLO UNIVERSITY, ZARIA
3. SENATE, AHMADU BELLO
UNIVERSITY, ZARIA DEFENDANTS
4. VICE CHANCELLOR, AHMADU BELLO
5. REGISTRAR, AHMADU BELLO UNIVERSITY
Parties Absent and
No legal representation.
1. The Plaintiffs’ claims against the Defendants are as follows: 1
A declaration that the tenure of the Plaintiffs jointly and severally on the Council of Ahmadu Bello University is for four years commencing from ‘their inauguration as Council Members by the Federal Government on 10th February 2099,
2. An. order compelling 1st, 2nd , 3rd , 4th and 5th Defendants by themselves or through their agents to recognize respect and accord all the rights and privileges of Council membership to the Plaintiffs until the completion of their four year tenure commencing from the date of their inauguration on 10th February 2009.
After the exchange of pleadings, both the Plaintiff and the Defendants called a witness each and tendered numerous documentary exhibits. Also, their respective counsel filed and adopted their brief of argument. his Written Address, learned counsel for the Defendants Mr. Onuh formulated the following issues for determination thus:-
1. Whether or not the tenure of the Council of the 1st Defendant is for to academic calendar that is two years.
2. Whether or not the tenure of the Plaintiffs as members of the Council of the 1 Defendant commenced from the date of their election
It was submitted on behalf of the Defendants that the tenure of members of the Council of the 1 Defendant pursuant to Statute 4 paragraph 2 of the 1St Schedule to the Ahmadu Bello University (Transitional Provisions) Act Cap A14 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004 is four years or for such shorter period as the appointing person or bodies shall determine. Thus, by virtue of the provisions of Section 18(3) of the Interpretation Act the word Lot shall in any enactment be construed disjunctively and not as implying similar. Reliance was placed on Dr Kabirikarn VS Emefbr (2009) AD FWLR (Prt 494) 1425 at 1443 and Ngige Vs Obi (2006) All FWLR (Pit 330) 1041 at 1172
It was submitted, further that the appointing body of the 1St and 2nd Plaintiffs is the. Senate while the 3rd plaintiff is appointed by the Congregation of the 1st Defendant. whose tenure is clearly stated in paragraph 6.0 sub 10 of the Procedure of Congregation to be two years. By exhibits D’, ‘E’ and ‘F’, the 5 Defendant has prescribed the Plaintiffs’ tenure to be two years. And whereas in this case, the language of any document is clear and unambiguous, the content of the document is to be given its ordinary meaning relying on Olatunde Vs .0. A. U (1998) 4 SCNJ 59. Further reliance was placed Von paragraph 10 of page 5 fl exhibit ‘H’ Minutes of the 6gth Ordinary Meeting of the Congregation dated 17th December 2003
On the second issue as formulated above, reliance was placed on exhibit D.’, ‘E’ and ‘F’ to the effect that the Plaintiffs’ tenure takes effect from 91 August 2007 that is immediately they started attending meeting of the 1st Defendant’s Council. That although by Section 2A of the Universities (Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Act Cap A14 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004 provides for the tenure to commence from inauguration but that according to the Defendants’ counsel cannot serve the interest of justice as the Plaintiffs were elected in August 2004 while the inauguration was clone one year six months (1 ½ year) after their election and that the immediately started reaping the benefits by attending meetings and collecting sitting allowances. Reliance was placed on Inaloju Vs Adeleke (2007) All FWLR (Frt 353) 3 at 119 - 120 and Bologun Vs E 0 C B (Nig) Limited (2007) All FWLR (Prt 382) 1952 at 1975 to the effect that the Court is more interested in substance than in mere form. That justice can only be done if the substance of the matter s examined as reliance on technicalities leads to injustice.
While adopting the issues as formulated by the Defendants, the Plaintiffs’ counsel Mr. Johnson contended that Section 2A of the Universities (Miscellaneous Provisions) amendment Act 2003 clearly stipulates a four-year tenure for the Council members commencing from the date of their inauguration.. That the Universities (Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Act 2003 amended the Universities (Miscellaneous Provisions)’ Amendment Act No. 71 of 1993. It was thus submitted that whereas in the instant case; the tenure of the Plaintiffs is statutorily prescribed to the be four years from the date of inauguration as members of Council, no letter or act of the 5th Defendant can reduce or add to it.
The issues as identified by the respective counsel are apt for the determination of this case. That is to say whether the tenure of the Plaintiffs is two or four years and how do you commute the said duration. Learned Defendants’ counsel has alluded to the fact that the tenure is either four or two years as the appointing body determines
Parties are ad idem that the Plaintiffs are members of the Ahmadu Bello University Council vide their appointment by the Senate and Congregation respectively. Also• by virtue of Statute 4.2 to the Ahmadu Bello University Law Cap A14 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004, all members of the Council other than the ex-officio members shall hold office for four years o for such shorter period as the appointing person or bodies shall determine, Except where otherwise provided, all retiring members shall be V eligible for re-appointment. While the 1st and 2nd Plaintiffs were appointed into the Council by the Senate, the 3rd Plaintiff was appointed by the Congregation aid by 4rtue of Rule 10 of the Congregation, he shall hold office for two academic years It is beyond argument that the Plaintiffs were appointed into the Council on the 9th day of August 2007 and had assumed office by attending meetings and collecting sitting allowances even though then formal inauguration was sometimes in February 2009 The question is which is the effective date of then assumption of office in the Council? Neither Section 1 of the Ahmadu Bello University Law nor Statute 4 thereof made reference to the inauguration date for the purpose of computation of the duration period It was held in plethora of judicial decisions that one of the cardinal cannons of interpretation is that the words of a Statute when clear and unambiguous are to be given their grammatical and meaning See Akun Vs Mangu Local Government Area (1996) 4 NWLR (Prt 441) 207. Thus, the time of inauguration cannot be the commencement period for computing the Plaintiffs’ tenure in the Council of the 1st Defendant.
It is also the law that courts are bound to enforce the mandatory provis1ons of a substantive law Thus, Thus the duty of all courts to give effect to legislations. In Inakoju Vs. Adeleke (supra), it was held that parties cannot by consent or acquiescence or failure to object,
nullify the effect of a Statute or Constitution. In the case at hand, the tenure of the Council was fixed for four years or such shorter period as the appointing person or bodies shall determine. This presupposes
that unless and until the appointing person or bodies shorten the period, the council members other than ex-officio members shall hold office for four years from the date of their appointment into the Council of the 1S Defendant. It is nowhere shown that the appointing person or body in this case has reduced the tenure of the 1st and 2nd Plaintiffs to two years in the Council of the 1st Defendant.
In the light of the above, the and 2nd Plaintiffs tenure in the Council of the Defendant shall be four years effective from the 9th day of August 2007.
JUSTICE M. L. SHUAIBU
COMMITTEE OF CONCERNED PROFESSORS
AHMADU BELLO UNIVERSITY ZARIA
16th April, 2012
The Vice-Chancellor/Chairman of Senate,
Ahmadu Bello University,
PETITION FOR THE NULLIFICATION OF 2012 SENATE ELECTIONS TO COUNCIL ON THE GROUNDS OF ILLEGALITY
1. We are encouraged by the press statement issued by your chief media consultant, Mallam Isah Waziri Guantu in “The Nation” and “Daily Trust” newspapers of Monday 9th April 2012.
Therein you stated your resolve to return A.B.U. Zaria to the path of due process of law and eliminate religious and ethnic sentiments which unfortunately has become the official policy in the management of the Affairs of A.B.U. today.
2. In view of your above said resolve therefore, we are encouraged to bring to your notice the illegality in the conduct of the 2012 senate election to council and to appeal for its cancelation being an illegally conducted election.
3. Our grounds for the above appeal are as outlined below:
a. At the March 2012 senate meeting, the Registrar and secretary to senate circulated a memo dated 21/11/2011 titled “The judgment in suit No. FHC/KD/CS/92/2009. ., ‘between Dr A. A. Akume & 2 others V. A.B.U see copy attached.
In the said memo, your attention was drawn by the Registrar to the Federal High Court Kaduna Judgment Of October,2011 which declared that the plaintiffs, Dr A. A. Akume & Co were wrongly removed from the council as senate representatives after spending only two years of their 4years tenure. Hence Court ordered that their tenure was 4 years and not two years as was wrongly interpreted by the senate. In view of the above, there was therefore no vacancy for an election to take place from senate to council. To avoid contempt of the Court, the proper thing would have been to respect the Court Order, restore those illegally removed from council back to council to complete their tenure. Ignoring the Court order and proceeding to conduct an election in March 2012 is nothing less than an illegality.
b. The practice and procedure in the senate when ever a vacancy occurs is for the Chairman of senate to call a senate meeting and declare the said vacancy openly and call upon senate to approve the holding of election to fill the declared vacancy and also approve the guidelines for the election.
In the case of the March 2012 senate to council elections, the electoral committee of senate for the first time in the nearly 50 years of A.B.U. senate, proceeded on its own violation to declare vacancy in the senate to council elections and within 24 hours of the declaration, proceeded to conduct elections to council without notice to all senate members. Only a few members were informed and the electoral committee with the aid few conducted an election in secret and declared their preferred and pre-arranged candidates as winners. They therefore seek to impose the will of a few on the majority of senate members who never even knew any elections were held.
c. No vacancy could have been successfully declared in the face of the, Court judgment mentioned in paragraph 3 (a) above. It appears that the arrangement of a secret election was to prevent the senate from discussing and resolving on whether there was any vacancy at all in senate representative in council for an election to hold in the face of the said Court Judgment.
d. The legitimacy of the senate electoral committee is also- doubtful. The said committee had lost its mandate to conduct any elections since two of its members were no longer members of senate at the time they conducted the said elections. For example, Alh. Y.M. Baraya of department of mathematics (Lecturer ii) and Mal. Sufiyanu Aminu of department of History (Assistant lecturer) were members of senate from 2009-2011.
At the 72nd meeting of congregation held in December 2011, vacancies were declared of all congregation representatives in senate which included Baraya and Sufiyanu. As at March 5th 2011 when the issued notice of senate elections they were no longer members of senate. They therefore did not have the mandate to conduct elections for the senate. e. At its 72 meeting in December,201 1, congregation by resolution declared the seats of congregation representatives in senate (2009- 2011) vacant and approved election to hold to fill the vacancies. The said congregation members ceased to be members of senate. It is therefore an illegality for their names to appear on the senate voters list and for them to vote to produce new representatives in council for the senate.
f. Legally, the senate is usually reconstituted after congregation elects a number equal to 30% of ex-officio of senate to represent it in the senate. It is this newly reconstituted senate members that comprises the authentic voters register for future elections like the one held on 7th March to elect senate representatives in council. It was therefore an illegality to use a voters register other than that of the reconstituted senate members to elect senate representatives to the council.
g. The congregation may elect only a number equal to 30% of the ex-officio members of senate as its representatives to the senate. This number amounts to 34 members only. Professors are not in the senate ex-officio (i.e. by virtue of office) hence notice of senate meetings to professors are addressed in their individual names while notices to ex-officio members are addressed to their respective offices. It is therefore an illegality to elect 87 members from congregation to senate and use them to elect senate representative in council.
h. Congregation at its 72’ meeting of December, 2011 resolved that only holders of terminal Degrees (Ph.D) should be elected to the senate. The illegally constituted senate Electoral committee proceeded to issue illegal guidelines allowing Assistant Lecturers to be elected to senate.
4. The above illegalities were carried out by the senate electoral committee. They are therefore incompetent to receive appeals over complaints regarding their conduct. You are therefore the appropriate officer as chairman of senate, to address these issues.
5. Accept our kind regards please.