By Sunday Emmanuel

The Education Rights Campaign (ERC), University of Ibadan branch, has condemned the reaction of the University of Ibadan Students’ Union president to the recent Federal High Court judgment nullifying the suspension of Aduwo Ayodele, Mide Gbadegesin, and Nice Linus popularly known as the UI3 while urging  students to demand a congress to address pressing welfare concerns.

This was disclosed in a press statement signed by the branch secretary, M.N. Ochi, on Tuesday, May 5, 2026.

According to the ERC, it expected the Union leadership to welcome the ruling as a victory for students’ rights rather than question its validity.

“Rather than welcome this judgment as a victory for student rights and democratic struggle on campus, the UI-SU President attempted to fault the judgment with the claim that the university administration was not present in court on the day the judgment was delivered,” the statement read.

The group argued that the president’s position reflects a lack of solidarity with student activists and signals a growing disconnect between the Union leadership and students’ realities.

“The position expressed by the UI-SU President clearly shows that the current leadership is more sympathetic to the university administration, with little or no solidarity for student activists who were unjustly punished,” it added.

Related: A Judgment Cannot Be Passed If the Other Party Is Absent — UI SU President

The ERC further stated that the judgment extends beyond the affected students, describing it as a broader victory against the suppression of dissent on campus.

“This judgment is not merely a legal victory for the UI3 but a broader victory for all students. It establishes that university administrations cannot weaponize suspension to silence dissent or suppress opposition to anti-student policies such as fee hikes and deteriorating welfare conditions.”

It also rejected claims that the UI3 failed to carry the Union along in the legal process, describing such arguments as baseless.

“The argument that the UI3 did not carry the SU leadership along in the legal process is both baseless and misleading. The SU leadership cannot plausibly claim ignorance of the legal challenge mounted by the affected students,” ERC wrote.

“In any case, the students did not require official approval from the Union before seeking justice in court.”

The group further criticised the Union leadership’s approach to ongoing student issues, particularly its decision to convene a stakeholders’ meeting instead of a congress.

“This should be seen only as a step toward mobilising for a Students’ Union Congress, and never as a substitute for it,” the ERC stated.

“A Congress provides a platform for the widest participation of students in discussions and decision-making processes affecting their welfare. In contrast, a stakeholders’ meeting limits participation and excludes the majority, thereby weakening collective engagement and accountability”

The ERC also stressed that issues such as the ongoing power crisis in Mellanby, Tedder, and Queen’s Halls, alongside broader welfare concerns, require collective deliberation.

It, therefore, called on students to demand the immediate convocation of a congress to discuss the court judgment and wider welfare challenges.

“Students must insist on the immediate convocation of a Congress where the court judgment and its implications can be thoroughly discussed alongside broader issues affecting the student body. The ongoing power crisis in Mellanby Hall, Tedder Hall, Queen’s Hall, and similar challenges across campus should not be treated in isolation but addressed as part of a wider struggle for improved welfare conditions.”

“A Congress would not only enable students to deliberate on these interconnected issues but also serve as a means of rebuilding confidence in the Union and strengthening its legitimacy.” It noted.

In stating their demands, the group urged the university administration to fully comply with the court ruling, including the unconditional reinstatement of the affected students.

Additionally, it demanded that the SU president retract his earlier statement while calling for urgent convocation of a Students’ Union Congress to democratically determine the next steps in defending students’ rights and welfare.