Barely hours after Governor Bassey Otu appointed new Acting Vice Chancellor for the University of Cross River State (UNICROSS), I’ve been bombarded with phone calls and messages seeking explanation on why another Acting VC appointment was accepted by the Alumni that had hitherto asked for substantive appointment.
It is true that over three months ago, the alumni association issued a statement demanding an end to the appointment of Acting VC and urged the Governor to appoint a substantive VC. The alumni issued the statement at the time, conscious of the extant laws establishing the university. However, the Governor could not act immediately as he was still awaiting a comprehensive report on some issues affecting the institution.
When all was set for the appointment of a new VC, the law made it impossible for a substantive appointment. According to Section 3(3) Article 2a of the UNICROSS Establishment law, the university must advertise the vacancy for the Vice Chancellor position three months before the appointment, with the advertisement running for six weeks.
Given that the outgoing Acting VC had already spent about four months, two weeks in office, the Governor had to appoint another Acting VC to meet the legal requirements for a substantive appointment. Even if the outgoing VC had stayed for six months, the timeline would have still made it legally impossible to start and complete the process of appointing a substantive VC from when government was ready to take action on the matter.
This goes without saying that the Governor’s decision was a necessary step to comply with the UNICROSS Establishment Law. Note that any attempt to bypass the process to appoint a substantive VC would have exposed the university into avoidable legal disputes.
Inyali Peter, Ph.D.
Comments
Post a Comment