There is this sense of responsibility that comes with being the first of something in an African

setting. Interestingly, this mode or aspect of ideology is not just peculiar to the African continent alone, but happens to have a  resonation with other cultures, tribes, races, and people from other continents around the world. However, it has a stronger emphasis here in Africa. In Africa it connotes quite a number of things in both the negative and positive equally. Irrespective of whatever negative connotations being the first of something might be, in most cases, nearly all cases, positivity is always attached to it. For example, in the Nigerian local market, it is believed that you do not reject the first customer that approaches early in the morning, or probably in the first opening business-hours of the day. Especially for people who live in Lagos, this hack can help you get things at a very ridiculously cheap price, same also with transportation. On some very lucky days, one could get to work without paying a dime, although sometimes, situation and circumstances determine how these things play out.

Now, being the first of its kind, when it comes to an institution, comes with a number of responsibilities, and leadership roles more like a natural default expectation. Being the first can easily connote leadership, being a vanguard and leading the way on. Correspondingly, bodies, institutions, departments, and faculties in response to this, have also naturally accepted this as a reality, consciously or subconsciously, and hence, have strived to maintain this pace of being a pace setter indeed, showing others the way. Although, in some cases, institutions have not been able to meet these unwritten, informal but subconsciously expected standards. 

Now when we talk of institutions in Nigeria, the University of Ibadan is infallibly the first higher institution in Nigeria, having been established in 1948. Following the establishment of the institution, was the commencement of studies in humanities, which today has become the Faculty of Arts, following this also. And ever since then, the University of Ibadan has strived to keep the vanguard pace in the country, and strongly arguable in West Africa inclusive. Now, the Faculty of Arts being a premier Faculty, it is expected that in all ramifications, the faculty lead the university at the faculty level. Although, one can arguably state that the University of Ibadan has indeed successfully strived to maintain the vanguard pace. Now, to what extent this statement is correct can be debated, however that is not the matter at hand. 

Having established the above, it will be clear as to why certain standards are expected to be displayed and certain things not to be heard of the in Faculty of Arts, especially when it comes to its student association. Association of Faculty of Arts Students, AFAS, is expected to be a leading students association in the university. Hence, as a matter of example, some things ought not to be heard of in the faculty. The Faculty is where humanities as a discipline is domiciled, a place where humanities is a native of. So, at this point, there might be a need for refreshing of memory, what is being referred to as humanities? It can be described as an area of academic discipline that studies aspects of human society and culture. By the implications of the studies, it is expected that anyone in the humanities studies should have a better understanding of how human society works or should work. Hence, it should be that when there are problems in other faculties on campus, the Faculty of Arts should serve as a beacon for them. It only becomes a case of disappointment when the Faculty becomes a hub of unbelievably controversial issues. It is in the Faculty of Arts one find executives collecting data in the students association’s name, and later diverting it for personal use/profits and gains, without handing over the data to the students association. And that is in the matters of the first WhatsApp TV AFAS had, which has now been renamed “Campus Station” from “AFAS TV” it was bearing, this is a clear example of outright clear broad daylight theft. Data is crucially a big deal, and the theft of data is basically a crime. The “Call-off Party” of the Akoem-led Regime also raised a lot of dust in the faculty, so much that Ayoola Akinyemi, Akoem, still had one or two explanations with the Students Disciplinary Committee several months after completing his degree. Likewise, in the tenure preceding that of Akoem, the faculty went through a very tough situation that made the whole faculty seem on fire. And that was on issues surrounding the dinner party of the association, where students funds meant to cater for the welfare of students, were diverted to a dinner party, as against people who actually paid for the dinner party, the consequence of which was an incomplete welfare package. It was also in the regime of the Akoem-led administration, that the Vice President, Jumoke Olorunfemi, combined all AFAS groups under a commercial brand name she operated personally. And if the list continues, one will certainly run out of reading time. The unnecessary problems and issues that AFAS has dragged over the years are simply common-sense-solving issues, but it has become a maniacally bewildering embarrassment to members of AFAS, as the faculty seems to always find itself in one mud or the other. 

Now, in recent times, the issue bedevilling the association now, stems from the result of being torn in-between two constitutions. A bewildering wonder is that this is surprisingly quite a protracted issue.  As crucially vital a constitution is to a body or an association, it should be the least object to serve as a bone in the throat. The Constitution should be a sacrosanct binding rule in any society, it is the determinant of everything in a society, a definer of purpose, the very concrete mould of the destiny of any associations and even humans alike. The constitution contains rules, regulations, and stipulations to guide us as humans, hence, one can reckon with the statement that “Rules… without them, we live with the animals” as often repeated by Winston in the movie, “John Wick”, matters of the constitution are serious matters to be taken seriously at any given time. Unfortunately, the AFAS constitution has always stood at a questionable angle for a while now, and without doubt, attempts have been made to make it as plain as possible and less contradictory. For example, one major disturbing lump in the AFAS constitution from experience and occurrence has been the issue of the CPS. The CPS, having been placed under so much burden of responsibility by the AFAS constitution, is very frowned at by the faculty management, and as a matter of fact has been proscribed by the faculty’s management for a while now. At least, there was nothing of such during the Ayanfe-led regime in AFAS, although the resulting resolutions of the body during the Akoem-led regime, led to the clamping down of its activities by the faculty’s management. It is worthy of note, that there was a strict proscription of this body, in fact, the faculty management does not even want to hear the name CPS at all. Yet, the president went ahead to create a WhatsApp group for this same proscribed CPS.

Furthermore, still on the raging issue of matters surrounding the AFAS constitution, evidently there was a review of the constitution some academic years back. Interestingly, some members of the constitution review committee back then must have either been done with their; NYSC, currently serving, about to be mobilised for services, or in their final year or pen-ultimate year. Quite a number of amendments were made to the Constitution, and the CPS automatically fell out of the Constitution after being reviewed. The reviewed constitution also separated students’ welfarism as a responsibility from the office of the Director of Social. Hence, according to the reviewed constitution, there would be a Director of Social and a Director of Welfare. As events unfolded, there was a congress held to approve the reviewed constitution so it could start being in use, which was approved. However, the strange thing that played out, was that the executive council stuck to the constitution before review, hereinafter referred to as “old constitution” in context, while the FLC operated by the constitution as reviewed, hereinafter also referred to as “new constitution” in context. Now, as elections came up, the processes took place, however, as directed by the “new constitution”, and by a consequence, the office of the Director of Welfare was contested for. And according to all procedures and protocols as upheld by the “new constitution”, there was a winner for the elections of the post of Director of Social, unfortunately, the winner of this office by election, was unjustly not inaugurated as a member of the executive council of the Association of Faculty of Arts Students. 

Therefore, it is on this matter of a member of AFAS being treated unjustly and an examination of the process, that the AFAS Press wrote an article with the title “AFAS Constitution Brouhaha and The Fate of the Elected Welfare Director”, of which the President faculty of Olamilekan Adeniyi (Mojuba), decided to respond to by writing a rejoinder, and further copying AFAS Press and all departmental press alongside. Now, looking at the whole matter, starting from the back and forth of the constitutional matter, to the whole election activities (processes inclusive), the inauguration of members of the executive council except one, the eventual proscription of the “new constitution”, to the release of the AFAS Press article on the fate of the elected Director of Welfare, the President’s about 5 pages release he made, which he termed as a rejoinder is largely and summarily pointless, and his copying of all departmental press is subtly very questionable as to what his motives for the response and tagging really are? First is, what is a rejoinder supposed to be? Amongst the other element expected to be encountered in a rejoinder, is the element of being critical in terms of clear analysis, which is both scarce and very wanting in the President’s so-called “rejoinder”. His business to the matters of elections in terms of fixing faulty or vacant post in the association, is quite out of his jurisdiction and area of control or authority, he is the Executive President, not the “Legislative President” or “Chairman of the Electoral Committee”. Hence, he is expected to steer clear-off meddling with elections as much as possible, except at points when he is being involved by the constitution. This should even be a no-brainer in any democratic setting, let the people decide.

To this end, it becomes quite very amusing that the President of the association now assumes the role of declaring the fate of an elected member, because her election is not constitutionally backed by the same constitution used to run the election that brought the same him as President into office. The last election was conducted under the purview of the “new constitution”, and winners emerged from this election. Along the line, the “new constitution” was being proscribed, an overarching question remains, what is the just stand of the winners of the election. This is an election in which campaign and manifestos have been done and built on responsibilities as indicated by the “new constitution”, now there is a selective inauguration of elected winners to becoming members of the Executive council, this is a fact that silent treatment can never be given to. Another amusing fact is the President’s pointless and unnecessary reference to his breach of rules and regulations and how he was fined. The President’s short description of that matter clearly reveals a lot about how much he understands how these things work. The Electoral Committee can be described as a literal child of the Constitution, whatever they lay down as rules, regulations, and stipulations are as good as the Constitution itself. By stating, in a public release, how he declined from adhering to instructions from an Electoral Committee on the base of not being constitutional simply points to either his being naive or having a total disregard for the rule of law. 

To sum it all up, although the issue remains ever stretching, being the premier faculty in the premier university, the faculty ought to have transcended certain issues, and should have already built a problem-solving system. Things like paying dues and not getting packages are tantamount to broad daylight robbery the mainstream Nigerian politicians are guilty of. An AFASite has been robbed of either getting a complete package or getting any at all.  Either way, it is going to be argued, that for three consecutive regimes now, the issue of incomplete or outright lack of package has been the trend. The reason given for the proscription of the constitution, as reviewed, is that it has not been recognised by the Legal Unit of the university. This is a document that has been submitted to the legal unit for well over both an academic year and a Gregorian Calendar year. Another running motif in the faculty President’s “rejoinder”, is “my notice”, and “my consent”, and this also begs the question of what is running through the mind of Olamileka Adeniyi (Mojuba), as the President-elect of the association, and what definition he pictures his post in? Hence, there is a need to remind him of the fact that, he is an elected President, and not a President by prerogative in any way whatsoever. The presence of the Faculty Legislative Council is a very valid and strong voice of every single AFASite. The Association of Faculty of Arts Students has a balance of power between the legislative arm and the executive arm, and in the presence of a legislative council, there is no democratic setting, where the executive council will be saddled with the responsibility of conducting elections or declaring the status of an elected member. At this point, the President might need to be reminded that the system of government in AFAS is by extension of the country’s democratic and not a unitary system. Hence, the honourables of various constituents at the house level collectively remains a continuous voice of every AFASite, at most all he can do is forward a letter through the clerk of the house to the house when he feels the need to do so.