UNILAG Pro-Chancellor, Babalakin Resigns , as FG Visitation Panel Submits Report

0
201

BabalakinSequel to his alleged disagreement with the Federal Government on the Visitation Panel it sent to the University of Lagos , Dr. Wale Babalakin (SAN), has resigned his appointment, as the Pro- Chancellor of the University of Lagos, even as the Visitation Panel set up to investigate the leadership crisis  rocking the Institution submitted its report yesterday.

His  letter of resignation to the Minister of Education, Mallam Adamu Adamu was dated September 15, 2020, but it was made public barely a few hours after the submission of the report of the Visitation Panel.

He said  he had to resign for  the fact that the  visitation panel was raised to exonerate the Vice-Chancellor and implicate the Pro-Chancellor, adding that  it has come to a stage he must stand by his principles since the Federal Government believed the actions he took may not be right.

Babalakin disclosed  that  there were too many vested interests in UNILAG matter, who were not approaching the issues objectively saying that, although he appeared in protest before the panel, he made it clear that the panel 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.This is despite that he  has been the chairman of the negotiating team since January 6th, 2017.

According to him,  he had served the university system in Nigeria with his heart and intellect and  that  as Pro-Chancellor of the University of Maiduguri and the University of Lagos, he did not receive sitting allowances and other perks of office.

The letter which he also copied  to President , who is the Visitor to the university 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.

“I led the Governing Council of the University to remove the Vice-Chancellor of the University from office for amongst other reasons ranging from corruption and financial recklessness; Forgery;  Complicity in the collapse of the University library and planned cover up deliberate policy of wrongfully concealing information.

According to him,  ‘’Others include  depriving the Faculties in the University of funds; concealing and distorting finances of the Internally Generating Units of the University; undermining the academic process and seeking to appoint a Professor by fiat and  siphoning of the University’s funds through dubious contract awards.

Others he said include ‘’Undermining the office of the Registrar; failure to follow due process in organizing the University’s convocation ceremony; and ponsoring or acquiescing in the unconstitutional actions of the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU), University of Lagos chapter.

“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.”

He  faulted the terms of reference of the committee,  saying it  was empanelled to exonerate the Vice-Chancellor and implicate the Pro-Chancellor.