It is a new semester, the second half of the academic session. This period often shapes many of the defining moments on campus, from academic engagements to major student activities and anticipated events. It is also the season of politics, social engagements, and the contest for influence and leadership.

While these activities return every year, they are not without purpose. Perhaps the most defining feature of the second semester is its political atmosphere. For many students, campus politics becomes a serious affair because it influences virtually every aspect of student life. Yet, as another political season begins, the questions we have always asked remain unanswered: Will competence prevail over popularity? Will history repeat itself with leaders who make promises but abandon them after assuming office? Will students remain non-partisan and demand accountability rather than personalities?

As lectures resume and campus regains its rhythm, the questions that matter most are not about what has changed, but about what will.

On leadership: Will leadership move beyond promises to performance?

We know the script by now: aspirants make wild promises to win votes, only to vanish once they are in office. Suddenly, when the next election cycle kicks off, those forgotten commitments are miraculously dusted off, and campus activities spike again.

During the previous session, several administrations from the Students’ Union to hall, faculty, and departmental associations fell short of campaign promises. One example is Team Altruism, whose administration has yet to deliver hall merchandise paid for by students in the previous session.

While the merchandise mascot design was decided in July, when students demanded accountability, satisfactory explanations remained scarce. Not to mention several other manifesto plans that never saw the light of day.

The road from promise to plan delivery remains a recurring concern, specifically regarding accountability. In recent years, allegations ranging from financial misconduct and abuse of office to disciplinary referrals involving elected officials have repeatedly surfaced.

Whether from the 2023 allegations against the then Students’ Union PRO, concerns raised during the Covenant Oladele administration ranging from alleged financial misconduct and authority breach, or the recent disciplinary proceedings involving the Assistant General Secretary, these incidents have again revealed the rot that exists in our leadership.

Student politics should not become merely a ladder to higher office. In recent times, some representatives appear more focused on their next election than on fulfilling the mandate they were elected to perform. Representation loses its meaning when offices become stepping stones rather than platforms for service.

ALSO READ: UISU Politics: Do Not Let Them Use You 

Real leadership is not about victory speeches or shiny campaign posters; it is about actual, measurable impact. Campus politics is often a popularity contest that rewards sentiment over substance, but the standard should not change. If you run, you owe us results, not just excuses.

Will students remain spectators or become active participants?

Democracy is not just about holding elections or filling seats. It falls apart without people who actually show up. Student government is no different.

The events of the previous academic session revealed both the possibilities and the limitations of student participation. The May 6 protest demonstrated that students can mobilise around issues that directly affect their welfare. Yet that mobilisation did not happen spontaneously. It was the product of relentless mobilisation across halls of residence, faculties, and departments by students who recognised that meaningful participation required more than brief expressions of dissatisfaction. Their efforts culminated not only in the protest itself but also in a congress that many feared would not attract the necessary participation if postponed. The message is clear: participation is possible, but it often depends on the persistence of a committed few rather than a culture embraced by the wider student community.

So, are students actually trying to shape their own future, or have we just resigned ourselves to watching from the sidelines waiting for someone else to do the heavy lifting of holding leaders accountable?

Election statistics paint a similarly concerning picture. According to the University of Ibadan, the institution has more than 39,000 matriculated students, all constitutionally eligible to vote and be voted for in Students Union elections. Yet the election that produced the current Students Union administration attracted participation from only a fraction of that population. President elect Adeboye Temidayo secured 2,943 votes, while even candidates who contested unopposed recorded fewer than 5,000 votes. These figures suggest that the mandate to govern the entire student body is often determined by the participation of only a minority. Similar patterns have been observed in departmental and faculty elections, where student participation frequently remains low despite the direct impact these representatives have on academic and welfare matters.

This pattern becomes even more apparent within the elected student representative council. During the election that produced the new Speaker of the 13th Student Representative Council, 124 votes were recorded out of an expected 161 Honourable members, with reports indicating that 20 votes were cast by members who were not physically present. Whether explained by unavoidable circumstances or otherwise, such figures invite reflection on the level of commitment expected from those entrusted with representing thousands of students. Representation begins with showing up.

Students cannot expect accountability from leaders while remaining absent from congresses, indifferent during elections, or disengaged from the conversations that shape our realities on campus. If this semester is to produce different outcomes from those before it, it depends on the student body, whose participation gives legitimacy to leadership and whose silence often allows familiar shortcomings to persist.

On Welfare: Will student welfare finally receive sustained attention?

Student welfare remains one of the most persistent concerns on campus.

The previous semester was defined by recurring reports of electricity disruptions, water shortages, transportation concerns, accommodation challenges, and sanitation issues. While some of these problems attracted responses from both the university administration and the Students’ Union, many of them continue to resurface, raising a fundamental question: is student welfare being addressed through sustainable solutions or temporary measures?

Electricity remained the most visible welfare challenge throughout the semester. IndyPress documented repeated disruptions across several halls of residence, with students enduring prolonged periods without power. In Mellanby Hall, residents experienced an outage that lasted about seven days, while the recurring faults associated with the Ring Road 5 transformer repeatedly disrupted electricity supply across affected areas of the university. Beyond emergency responses and technical explanations, students continue to ask whether a more reliable and long term solution is being pursued.

The consequences extended beyond electricity alone. Water supply on campus remains heavily dependent on stable power, meaning that every prolonged outage quickly translates into water shortages.

Accommodation presents an even broader picture of unresolved welfare concerns. Over the past session, IndyPress documented recurring sanitation and hygiene challenges across halls of residence, while its investigation into campus waste management revealed a system under considerable strain. The report, which assessed 69 waste collection points, found 44 awaiting evacuation, exposing how waste disposal had increasingly become reactive rather than routine.

These sanitation concerns exist alongside other longstanding problems that students continue to endure, including persistent bedbug infestations, deteriorating hostel facilities, and kitchenettes that remain unsuitable for use despite repeated complaints.

Students deserve a welfare system that is proactive rather than reactive, one that replaces temporary relief with lasting solutions.

Will our learning conditions improve?

A popular saying holds that “The greatest threat to freedom is the absence of criticism” 

The previous semester exposed several challenges that continue to affect the learning experience. In some faculties, including the Faculty of Arts, lectures commenced weeks into the semester. As seen over the years, no tangible explanation is given to the delay.

Other issues like limited laboratory facilities continue to constrain practical learning in some disciplines, while overcrowded lecture theatres remain a recurring challenge. If this semester is to be truly different, improving learning conditions must receive the same urgency as every other aspect of student welfare.

Identifying the problems is the easy part; the hard part is actually fixing them. The university might have extended the semester to 13 weeks, but the real issues rotting our education are still being ignored.

In conclusion, criticism is not an attack; it is the bare minimum requirement for accountability. If we want a functioning student community, we have to keep asking the hard questions, even when it is uncomfortable. Journalism can highlight the problems, but it cannot fix them alone. This semester is a fresh start, what we do with it is up to us. The true measure of the next few months will not be in how many events are held, but in whether we finally have the courage to demand better than what we settled for yesterday.