…As expelled students protest innocence
Ajayi Crowther University, Oyo, a faith-based tertiary institution is currently enmeshed in a controversy over expulsion of some students over what many called trumped-up charges. Parents of the students expelled are accusing the university authorities, particularly the Vice Chancellor, Prof. Dapo Folorunsho Asaju, of wrongful accusations and of being hell-bent in his attempt to destroy the future of their children.
Prof. Asaju who doubles as the Bishop Theologian of the Anglican Communion in Nigeria, said there is no going back on the expulsion of the students. In a chat with some newsmen, the Vice Chancellor insisted that the senate of the university has already taken the decision on the expulsion and the decision remains final.
Parents are however kicking that due process, as laid down in the schools “Students Handbook of Information and regulations” was not followed in expelling the students, who were mostly accused of taking hard drugs, which is a criminal offence. Besides, the university is being accused of not following its own laws in determining the expulsion of the students.
Trouble started for the students in the evening of April 7, 2017 when Prof. Asaju visited the hall of residence of the students over a rising angst occasioned by power cut. The students were alleged to have been angered by incessant electricity failure which usually leads to water scarcity in the hall. Some students were alleged to have poured water on the Vice Chancellor who reportedly left the scene in anger.
Four days after the incident, on April 11, 2017, the university authorities drew and published names of 70 students, asking them to appear before the university disciplinary committee the following day, April 12.
The committee comprises the Vice Chancellor, Registrar, Dean, Students Affairs, University Legal Officer, two students (elected by students fellowship), and the Students Affairs Officer who acts as secretary while the VC is the chairman. Also in attendance are the hall administrators, deans and heads of departments of the affected students, academic officer, chief security officer, Guidance and Counselling officer, and the university chaplain.
Recounting his experience when he appeared before the committee, one of the affected students, Tosin Aiyemoniafe, 18, and a 300 level student of the Department of Business Administration, noted that, “on the evening of April 11, a list of about 70 students was published to appear before the disciplinary committee on April 12, 2017 by 9 a.m. I did not bother to check the list because I never thought my name could be there. It was about 8.45 am when a friend called me and asked why I was not at the disciplinary committee. I had to attend as instructed; During the interrogation, I was surprised that they wrote an allegation that I was caught smoking Indian hemp on Wednesday, November, 2016. I was asked to defend the allegation. I simply told them that I have never smoked even cigarette in my life and I was asked to go.”
Criticizing the procedure, Aiyemoniafe said: “The customary thing that is done is that when a student is caught doing such things, a picture of such student is taken, security officers are called in, he or she would be made to write a statement and the remnants of whatever he or she is smoking would be obtained as evidence; after that he would asked to complete a misconduct form.”
The University regulation, he said, is even stricter. Chapter Three of the University Handbook categorizes offences into two types: misconduct and criminal offences. Misconduct is offences that border on unruly behaviour, indecent behaviour, vandalism, membership of secret cult, transfer of bed space and several other offences.
Criminal offences, according to the handbook, include fraud, theft, burglary, assault occasioning harm, murder, possession of firearms, arson, rape, and possession and use of hard drugs and drug trafficking. Possession of Indian hemp belonged to this category. It further states that: “all criminal cases shall be handed over to the police for necessary action.”
Section 23 of the handbook, he argued, further made it clear that “the use of hard drugs which includes Indian hemp, cocaine, heroin, etc is highly prohibited in the university. Section 23(ii) stated: “Any student found in the possession or using hard drugs of any kind will be suspended indefinitely and referred for psychiatric treatment. If found guilty, he or she will be expelled from the university and handed over to the police for prosecution.”
Aiyemoniafe contends that in his own case the university had no picture of the Indian hemp allegedly found on him. Neither was he handed over to the police, nor suspended according to the rules. He was also not mandated to fill any form. Yet, on April 18, 2017, the school published in its website his name and 13 others as having been expelled.
Another student, Olanrewaju Segilola, reported facing the disciplinary committee on charges of throwing water on the VC, and smoking Indian hemp. He however denied the accusations. In his letter of appeal which he said was never read before the expulsion, he denied being one of the one who turned off the light before water was thrown at the VC nor one of those who did the pouring.
“I would never disrespect any member of staff of this university talk less of the Vice Chancellor in any way not to think of throwing water at him,” he wrote. “That fateful night, I was with some of my colleagues. We were involved in a heated argument after the end of a football match we had watched together. Apparently, due to our loud voices, the porter thought that we were fighting and came out to caution us. I think we were stupid not to adhere to his instruction. It was while this argument was on that some boys turned off the hall lights and then threw water at the VC. I must reiterate that I did not turn off the light neither did I throw any water at the VC. I was only unfortunate to be in the residence of the hall where this unscrupulous act was carried out.”
On the issue of smoking weed, he said: “I was wrongly accused by one of the porters assigned to the hall for smoking Indian hemp in the school premises, and I can confidently walk up to him to confirm my innocence over this allegation. On the day I was allegedly reported to have smoked Indian hemp, I just woke up and went to wash my face in the hall bathroom, and this porter walked past me. He cannot say he saw me smoking or in possession of Indian hemp. I was therefore surprised when I was accused of smoking Indian hemp when I had only gone about my business of washing and cleaning my face. He never caught me with Indian hemp, and this information can be confirmed from him by the University Board.”
Despite publishing their names as expelled students on its website, victims lament that no letter of expulsion was given to them or their parents. Yet since April, they have not been allowed back to the university. [to be continued next week]