By: Ismaeel Aleem
A citizens’ advocacy group has argued that the extension of the tenure of Osun State University (UNIOSUN) Vice-Chancellor, Professor Clement Odunayo Adebooye, does not amount to a constitutional breach and should be assessed on statutory and institutional grounds rather than political ones.
In a statement signed by Mayowa Ogundijo on behalf of Advocate for Citizens Justice and Democratic Accountability, the group maintained that a vice-chancellor’s tenure is governed primarily by the university’s enabling statute and related laws, not by any constitutionally entrenched five-year entitlement that cannot be altered.
It said that where a state-owned university’s law is validly amended through the prescribed process to allow an extension, such a step cannot automatically be branded unconstitutional.
“The critical legal questions are whether the amendment was validly enacted, whether the appropriate authorities acted within their powers and whether the extension complies with the amended law,” the statement said.
It added that “a statutory tenure can be altered by a valid statutory process; what the law creates, the law can lawfully modify.”
The group stressed that the original university law did prescribe a defined tenure, but that this did not permanently bar a subsequent lawful amendment.
It noted that Nigerian university governance has previously accommodated continuity in leadership through the applicable governing framework, and warned against equating a properly anchored extension with an unlawful attempt to circumvent the original provision.
Beyond the legal argument, the advocates pointed to institutional performance under Professor Adebooye’s administration.
They cited UNIOSUN’s reported 100 per cent success in the latest National Universities Commission (NUC) accreditation exercise and its rise among leading Nigerian universities in recent Webometrics rankings, alongside gains in research development, academic partnerships and the university’s national and international profile.
These achievements, they argued, provide legitimate grounds for considering continuity to consolidate ongoing reforms.
The group urged stakeholders to approach the matter with “constitutional maturity and institutional responsibility.”
Legitimate concerns about process should be subjected to legal scrutiny, it said, but political disagreement should not be presented as constitutional prohibition.
If the extension is properly supported by applicable law and due process, Professor Adebooye’s continuation should be judged principally by law, performance, accountability and the long-term interest of the university.
“The university needs stability to consolidate its gains, and continuity where lawfully provided and institutionally justified should not be portrayed as an offence against democracy,” the statement concluded.
“The law should be respected, but it should also be correctly understood.”