The year was 1991, Obafemi Awolowo Hall Of Residence buzzed and bustled as both male and female residents went around their daily business. Block A and C housed the male residents while Block B on the other hand was home to the female residents of the prestigious hall. With three (3) blocks at the time, like every other hall of residence, Awo Hall comprised of residents, the Executive Council and the Hall Representative Council, all of which were guaranteed in the hall’s constitution.

The constitution would soon be screwed and deconsecrated, serving more as nothing, but a torn book on the shelf collecting flakes of dust. Like a microcosm of the bigger society, the Obafemi Awolowo Hall now functions in a manner alike. This is soon to come to an end and maybe not all for the better. Awolowo Hall has faced various changes since its inception, some of which have made it, and others as concerns that should be redressed.

In the year 1987, the Obafemi Awolowo Hall was established, named after Chief Obafemi Awolowo. Chief Obafemi Jeremiah Oyeniyi Awolowo was a Nigerian nationalist and politician who played a key role in Nigeria’s independence movement. The hall served as the second formal postgraduate hall of residence in the university. In the year 1991, following a disaster that ravaged the prefabricated blocks of Queen Elizabeth II Hall, male and female undergraduate students were relocated to the hall. Later, the hall only housed female residents and no longer male students. These changes probably did not have that much of an impact on the dealings of the hall. However, one irreconcilable change that shook the hall and at its core even here in the future was the dissolution of the hall’s representative council of students. Sometimes between the year 2016 and the year 2019, the hall’s HRC, as it is shortly referred to, was dissolved leaving a void both in the constitution and the political structure of the great hall.

In hindsight, it is assumed that when the HRC was scraped, allegedly by the Hall Management, students had not thought of its impact or deserving of their response. The gravity of that decision has turned into a fundamental challenge for the current generation and residents. This decision, as a gateway, would lead to other actions that potentially (even in foresight) undermine the provisions of the constitution.

“To Vote And Be Voted For”: OAH’s Unconstitutional Innovation vs  Awo’s Democracy 

The Obafemi Awolowo Hall, named after Chief Obafemi Awolowo, stands as a testament to his enduring legacy of leadership, integrity, and inclusiveness. Awolowo’s name is synonymous with democratic principles and popular participation. But, the hall from an eyelid view seems to have departed from the democratic ideals the architecture was named after. The current constitutional framework and state of the student structure is a testament.

In the existing constitution of the Obafemi Awolowo Hall, the position of President is reserved exclusively for postgraduate students. This rule effectively disenfranchises a significant portion of the hall’s population — namely, the undergraduates. There are nine (9) blocks in the hall of residence, block A to H houses only undergraduates and a small section of Block I is home to postgraduate students. By restricting the presidency to only postgraduates, the constitution limits the pool of eligible candidates and inadvertently curtails the democratic rights of undergraduates to equally vote for and hold the highest office within their hall student community.

The restriction appears to contradict the spirit of equal representation that should underpin any democratic institution.

Leadership anywhere or across the globe should not be the exclusive reserve of a particular group. Rather, it should be open to all who wish to contribute, irrespective of their academic status. By limiting the eligibility criteria for the presidency, the constitution inadvertently sends a message that certain members of the hall are more deserving or qualified to lead, regardless of their leadership capabilities, their understanding of the hall’s unique dynamics and inabilities.

Constitutional Conventions and Apathy of Postgraduates

While the current provision in the constitution was presumably designed to bring what it narrowly viewed as ‘maturity and experience‘ to the hall’s leadership, as well as to include the postgraduate population in the activities of the hall, it has inadvertently led to a tradition where other positions, particularly that of the Secretary of State and Financial Secretary, have also been informally reserved for postgraduates, even though it was not stated so in the constitution.

 

(Section 13 of the Awo hall constitution which makes it mandatory for the President of the Hall to be a Ph.d or M.sc student present in the hall)

 

The above was a release by OAHIEC, the electoral committee last session which made forms for the President, Secretary of State, and Financial Secretary only available to postgraduate resident, contrary to the provisions of the constitution.

 

A later release by the same electoral committee after getting a low turn out from postgraduate residents for the positions of presidents, financial secretary and secretary of state. This release was made without a review of the constitution or even a resolution from a Congress. Attempts to get a response from the then Electoral Chairman on this issue proved abortive.

Over the years, this practice has not only become an unwritten rule but has also fostered a sense of apathy among postgraduate students who are perceived to be less interested in the hall’s day-to-day activities. The reasons for this lack of engagement are roughly suggested. Many postgraduate students have heavier academic workloads, more pressing research commitments, or simply feel that hall administration is better suited to undergraduates with more at stake in the social fabric of the hall life.

This apathy has created a recurrent challenge during electoral periods. It is a periodic headache, even for neighbouring halls. It is not uncommon to witness Awo hall members rallying around and trying to persuade postgraduate students to contest for these key positions. This process is often strenuous, with potential candidates being coaxed into participation, as many are reluctant to assume roles they feel disconnected from. At times, the situation reaches the point where postgraduate students themselves engage in closed-door negotiations, deciding who among them should reluctantly step forward to fill the constitutional requirement.

This reluctance has also led to an increasing number of presidential candidates running unopposed. When elections are held with limited or no competition in respect to competence, it undermines the democratic spirit that is supposed to guide student leadership and governance. An unopposed candidate, even if competent, lacks the feeling that comes from a robust electoral process. The outcome is often a leadership that lacks the dynamism, responsiveness, and creativity needed to address the hall’s diverse challenges.

A UCJ report in 2015 shows that an unopposed presidential candidate had lost the election, with the residents, mainly undergraduates pleading with the then present legislative arm to review the constitution and allow undergraduates run for president. Nothing resulted from the pleas.

To be fair, the Postgraduate perceived apathy as a concern may not be wholly true and should not be swallowed in entirety. The Postgraduate College, previously known as Postgraduate School, admits an average of 6,000 individuals out of about 15,000 applicants every year. The number is obviously huge as they say democracy is quite arithmetic in nature. That aside, there is a dire concern to take the general UI students community on a route of rebirth, where PG and UG students can both be and in all ramifications involved in the affairs of their own community. Students should be ideally willing to be involved in their own enterprise. But we need to activate that system.

The Electoral Committee or a Council Of Ghost Workers

According to the constitution, the electoral committee shall be made up of five electoral officers, who shall be elected by the congress. Over the years in Obafemi Awolowo Hall, it has been a trend that an electoral committee miraculously emerges, with no resident knowing how the committee was formed. The same could be said for the committee that brought in the last administration before they were impeached.

As always, many Awoites had no idea who formed the electoral committee or how at least. All efforts to grind out the truth was futile. For instance, IndyPress repeatedly placed a call through to the supposed electoral committee chairman. She failed consistently to grant an interview on the basis that Awo had its own press. Quite unthoughtful of her nearsightedness, she really did not understand how campus journalism works. Also a UCJ correspondent also reached out to her, the ‘electoral chair’ denied giving her response to the message.

(Section 37 of the constitution makes provision for the electoral committee.)

 

(A screenshot of the message sent to the then electoral chairman of OAHIEC)

 

(A screenshot of a message sent by Yesira, recently impeached President of Awo, an indication that she had no idea those who formed the committee and how)

“By The Power Bestowed On The Hall Warden” 

In recent years, the role of the Obafemi Awolowo Hall Warden has grown dramatically, effectively merging the powers historically held by the hall’s three branches of leadership — executive, legislative, and judicial — within its governance unlimited structure. This change comes after the contentious break-up of the Hall Representative Council (HRC), which has significantly altered the dynamics of leadership and decision-making inside the hall.

One of the most noticeable changes is in the management of hall dues. Unlike other halls, where students pay their dues directly to the executives, Obafemi Awolowo Hall students deposit their money into a microfinance bank account. The fund comes under the control of the hall management rather than elected students’ representatives. It was Professor Kenneth Mellanby, the first principal (1947–1953) of the University of Ibadan, in his book, “The Birth Of Nigeria’s University” who set the template of the argument that students associations should be devoid of external interference. Awo Hall situation therefore raises concerns, particularly among students, who believe their financial contributions needs to be accounted for. Not because it has been stolen. But because it is their right to know how their dues have always been expended in the absence of a legislative council. Students could think that far as democracy guarantees them. It is supposed to be their basic due. Is it not?

Furthermore, the Hall Management (again allegedly; because students are like mis-mag and are prone to repression) has taken over the HRC’s usual responsibility of scrutinizing and approving the hall executives’ budgets. This transfer of constitutional responsibility effectively eliminates the checks and balances that the HRC was designed to offer, consolidating enormous power in the hands of a person (we guess).

The hall management has also taken on the right to nominate and impeach hall executives, which was formerly the responsibility of the student body and its elected representatives. Last time, there were hearsays that the ‘hall warden’ impeached the Social and Sports Secretaries and forcibly expelled them from their quarters of responsibility without the hall occupants’ knowledge or agreement. This author hopes the claims are untrue. Such actions raise questions about due process and fairness. But we must know who indeed impeached the Social and Sports Secretaries? And why? The University of Ibadan is a public institution. The students’ community in Awo Hall should know. It is their right to know.

During the hall’s elections last year, this centralization of power became even more apparent. Only two undergraduates ran for the position of Vice President, while no postgraduate qualified to run for the presidency. In response, the Hall Warden (allegedly) took the unprecedented step of appointing the Vice President-elect as the new President, and then designated her opponent, who had lost the vice-presidential race, to assume the Vice President. This decision was made without regard for the constitutional provisions governing the hall’s elections and was done without consulting or gaining the approval of the student body, undermining their democratic rights.

More recently, the hall warden took another controversial step by issuing a statement that unilaterally announced the impeachment of the Hall President. This move has further entrenched the perception that the hall warden has assumed sweeping powers that should typically be distributed among various student governing bodies to ensure fairness, accountability, and representation.

These developments have left many students feeling disenfranchised and disillusioned. The consolidation of power in the hands of the hall warden has sparked widespread discussions about the erosion of democratic governance within the hall. It should be a concern to be corrected wherever such is perpetuated.

 

(A screenshot of a statement from the assistant secretary of state of awo hall and another from the awo hall warden)

The said ‘Oluwaseyi Adelere’ who was made the President, had picked up the form for the position of the President. But she was unable to scale through the electoral screening.

 

(A screenshot of the April-May electoral screening result)

Following the recent release by the Hall Warden, students criticized and made a backlash towards the happenings in Awolowo hall. However, speaking to Olaniyan Ibrahim, Chairman of the Council of Hall Chairpersons, he explained that the council had nothing yet to say about the situation in the hall as it was still being accessed; that was as of press time when he was quizzed about the situation of the hall.

Perhaps, as a result of the backlash received from students, the electoral committee which was set up for the previous session once again made a release announcing that the forms for the position of President amongst other executive positions was available and that only postgraduate could pick up the form for the position of President. According to the release, the Financial Secretary and Secretary of State position were also only open to postgraduates while the other positions including Assistant Financial Secretary, Bar and Buttery Minister, Minister of Information and Publicity, and Minister of Social and Welfare were only made available to undergraduate students. It should be noted that in the constitution, apart from the position of President, no other position was made exclusive to a particular class of persons. Why exclusive? Remember the animal farm allegory.

 

Following this release, another electoral screening, manifesto night and election was held, ushering in a new President, Secretary of state amongst others during the three weeks break. Including a minister of defence who was not voted for, but seemingly appointed.

 

It should be noted that the constitution of the hall doesn’t provide for a minister of defence but for a minister of security and intelligent services, who is to be voted for like every other executive.

It is apposite to say wish that may late Chief Obafemi Awolowo be sincerely happy about the incredible democratic conduct in the hall. But, will his legacies be pleased if certain fundamental corrections are not effected?

The need for key electoral reform cannot be generally overstated. The University of Ibadan students’ community needs it as much as the country, Nigeria. For the University of Ibadan community at writ, it is imperative that students’ associations must be duly seen as student bodies. Students are not indisposed of the intellectual acumen to direct their own affairs. Hence, every paraded interference when the branches of government of the students’ community have been trimmed short, is not the best way to train students in a country that is in dire need of premium leaders.

The need to restore students legislation in Obafemi Awolowo Hall of Residence cannot be overstated. If the constitution guarantees it, it should simply exist. If the constitution says there should be a time-framed Congress, it should not be denied. These are processes or structures that should not be wrongly perceived. They exist to make the job of other members of the hall management committee effective and desirable. The absence of a student legislative council in the hall is a void and must be rightly seen in that light. Without the council, who enact laws in the hall, approves expenditure and monitor the work of the Executive Council?