UI VC Tussle: Selection Of Two Representatives of Senate On Committee Not Free, Fair – VC Hopeful

0
21
University of Ibadan

*ask for nullification


By; BAYO AKAMO, Ibadan

One of the University of Ibadan Vice Chancellor hopeful,  Professor Adesoji Fasanmade has kicked against the election of Two Representatives of Senate on the Selection Committee for the Appointment of the institution’s new Vice-Chancellor. 
The Professor and Consultant Physician, Department of Physiology, College of Medicine, University of Ibadan in a petition  dated, 24, September, 2020 asked for the nullification of selection of the selection of the Two representatives of the Senator.
In the petition addressed to the Chairman, University of Ibadan Council and Pro Chancellor , University of Ibadan, Nde Joshua Waklek, the University of Ibadan Vice Chancellor hopeful stated that the said selection was not ” free and fair”, adding that, ” the distribution of the votes in the final result released does not follow the binomial distribution expected of free and fair elections”.  
” I am constrained to write this letter of protest as regards the election above which held on Monday September 21, 2020. My position is on the basis of the following irregularities which raise serious questions about the validity of the entire process and the results announced. The list (and details) of eligible members of Senate who had been accredited to vote in the election was not displayed (hard copy or electronically) before the election to enable confirmation of details and validation of those eligible to participate in the election”, he said.
Professor Fasanmade maintained “the list of candidates (along with their sponsors and supporters) confirmed as validly nominated was not displayed (hard copy or electronically) for scrutiny and records of Senate Members/entire University at any time before the elections”, saying, “an, as yet, undetermined number of Senate members were disenfranchised from voting as they did not receive the email containing the link to the voting platform on the day of the election”.
Emphasizing that “this, despite having received the link for the ‘mock elections’ a couple of days before,” he said, “when some of such voters enquired about the reason for this from the organisers, they were informed that this was due to ‘errors’ at the point of entering their email addresses. This suggests that email addresses were not uploaded directly, but were entered manually which makes it difficult to exclude ‘selective entry’ of voters’ email.” 
According to him, the “distribution of the votes in the final result released does not follow the binomial distribution expected of ‘free and fair’ elections,” and that “indeed, it is unprecedented that the two candidates earlier identified as being ‘candidates’ for a particular applicant would receive 60% of all votes cast, leaving the remaining seven candidates sharing the remaining 40% of votes”
“There are confirmed reports of ‘conference voting’ in some offices on Campus”, saying, “this violates the most important principle of ‘e-voting’ which is the enablement of individual voting from individual personal computers. The question begging for an answer is if the voters who undertook conference voting normally go to the said offices to read their emails on a daily basis.
“Sir, on the basis of the above, I am constrained to request that you kindly set-up a Council Committee to investigate the electoral process used in this election. I am also constrained to request that the entire election and the results released be nullified, and instead initiate a repeat election to be organized by an external body and monitored by Joint Council-Senate Committee whose membership will be agreed to by all candidates for the election.”ENDS.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here