Babalakin Accuses Visitation Panel To UNILAG Of Bias, Resigns

Pro-Chancellor of the University of Lagos, Dr. Wale Babalakin has resigned after he accused visitation panel to UNILAG of Bias.

Babalakin went into a squabble with Vice-Chancellor Prof. Toyin Ogundipe following which he “sacked” the VC.

But the government reversed the action and asked both of them to vacate office for a visitation panel to examine the situation.

The panel sat for two weeks during which it took evidence from all the parties in the dispute and submitted its report on Thursday.

Babalakin’s resignation letter was also released on Thursday although dated September 15.

The erstwhile pro-chancellor accused the visitation panel of having a pre-determined position to exonerate the VC and indict the pro-chancellor.

He said although he appeared in protest before the panel, he told panel members that they could not determine the issues before it.

He said he will also not be available again to serve as the chairman of the Federal Government Negotiation Team on the Agreement reached with university unions in 2009.

He has been the chairman of the negotiating team since January 6th, 2017.

He said he had served the university system in Nigeria with his heart and intellect.

He said as Pro-Chancellor of the University of Maiduguri and the University of Lagos, he did not receive sitting allowances and other perks of office.

He said he did not allow the two institutions to provide him with food or drinks.

He said he paid for every right or privilege that was conferred on me.

The letter of resignation was copied to President Muhammadu Buhari, who is the Visitor to the university.

The letter reads in part: ”I would like to thank the President of the Federal of Nigeria, President Muhammadu Buhari for giving me the opportunity to serve as the Pro-Chancellor of the University of Lagos (the “University”) from May 2017 till date.

“I am also grateful that I was considered fit to be the Chairman of the Federal Government Negotiation Team on the Agreement reached with university unions in 2009, from 6th January 2017 till date. I equally want to thank you, sir, for your role in recommending me to the President.

“Recent events have made my position in these two offices untenable.

“Sir, it is noteworthy that all the Federal Government Representatives who are the independent members on the Governing Council voted for the removal of the Vice-Chancellor.

“After calm had been restored in the University, the Visitor acting within his powers, set up a Presidential Visitation Panel to review the actions taken by Governing Council.

“The Vice-Chancellor (who had been removed from office) and myself were told to recuse ourselves for the duration of the Visitation Panel.

“I find it difficult to understand how a non-executive Chairman of a Governing Council could be requested to recuse himself during the visitation

“The Vice-Chancellor could only recuse himself if he were still in office. Implicit in this position is that the Vice-Chancellor was acknowledged as still being in office despite his removal.”

Babalakin faulted the terms of reference of the committee, which he claimed, were set to achieve a predetermined agenda.

Babalakin also alleged that the composition of the panel was awkward.

He said he only appeared before the Panel in protest because the panel could not determine the issues before it

He said: “The membership of the Visitation Panel is simply inappropriate in the circumstance. How can a committee of Vice-Chancellors determine the culpability or otherwise of the actions of a Pro-Chancellor and a Governing Council?”

“On the face of it, it is simply wrong. Furthermore, the Vice-Chancellors on the Panel were drawn from relatively smaller universities who are not likely to have a comprehensive understanding of the procedure contained in the University of Lagos Act (as amended).

“Even Vice-Chancellors of state universities were included. As Chairman of the Federal Government Negotiation Team, I know the challenges faced with the administration of state universities.

“I only appeared before the Panel out of my very great respect for you, Sir. My training as a lawyer revealed to me very clearly, that the Panel was inappropriate for the assignment.

“During my appearance, I made it very clear that I was appearing in protest and the Panel, as constituted, could not determine the issues before it. The active participation of the staff of the Ministry of Education in the Panel and their contributions throughout the sittings especially the hounding of witnesses who came to testify against the Vice-Chancellor was enough to show very clearly that the technocrats in the Ministry had a defined agenda.

The provision is seen to be against the provisions of sections 34 and 35 of the 1999 constitution, which guarantee the fundamental rights to freedom of liberty and human dignity.

Section 35(4) specifically provides that any person who is arrested or detained ”shall be brought before a court of law within a reasonable time”.

Subsection five states such period could be one day “in the case of an arrest or detention in any place where there is a court of competent jurisdiction within a radius of forty kilometres” or two days/longer period as may be considered by the court “in any other case”.