Emmanuel Awoko

In the last few days at the University of Ibadan, one of the common words that have been used wittingly or unwittingly is the word ‘stakeholder’. It is, however, hard to interpret whether it is formal or perhaps informal in some contexts. In a time like this, the word functions like a cruise, while in some other contexts it does not. Stylishly, it is also now a word used to shoot subtle attacks. Every of these usages from observation shows that the word is multifaceted and dynamic. In fact, syllabic-breaking of the word could elicit questions as: “what is at stake?” or perhaps “what are the holders staking?”. 

Simply put, and for the sake of clarity, the word stakeholder according to the Cambridge dictionary means a person such as an employee, customer, or citizen who is involved with an organization, society, etc., and therefore has responsibilities towards it and an interest in its success. That is, the context of usage in a setting such as we are implies that stakeholders can be categorically established as individuals who are saddled with the responsibility of performing some certain duties on behalf of the students. These set of people in the context of the University of Ibadan are therefore found in any of the functioning arms in the university that are politically, religiously, and socially inclined to perform a leadership role. 

The argument will then be wrong if the classification is not well observed. This is to say, representatives from faculties, departments, halls of residence, churches, organizations, and clubs on campus are all stakeholders even though not all of them are highly recognised and treated fairly. This is a narrative for another day which is predicated on variation and jurisdiction because limitation has to be maintained because of the bias in cases of religion, and emotional entanglements. 

To preside on the real discourse, on the 31st of August, 2024, it was a closed dawn on the supposed stakeholders when the final order of the university management mandated that all students vacate their halls of residence for a compulsory and unplanned three-week break within a very short notice. This reality questions the subject of power and portfolio saddled with responsibilities. Thus it becomes very evident to see how limited the students’ stakeholders are given that during campaigns, press nights, and manifesto night, they brag and make promises which, eventually, at the end of academic sessions, when records are tracked, are not fulfilled. Put differently, not many of them live up to fulfilling their promises; and even when the promises are near fulfillment, they are most times sub-par. 

As such, the question of what role the stakeholders are performing needs to be answered. Their major responsibility is not only limited to the collection of basic dues, the printing of a yearly book, and organising of merriment programs which “sometimes” are void of intellectual impact. It is, however, a sad reality on this note that we can infer that these stakeholders are not after the interest of the populace. Instead, the agenda behind their aspiration is to build a portfolio alongside their network for life after school. 

No wonder, the production of weak comrades is now more rampant, and as a result, the major discussion about the “state of the union” now revolves around how to approve budget and how to account for expenditures. It is the case that influencers are now the controller of power and little is known or said about the way forward on matters affecting the students. 

For every meeting being held, what are the things being discussed? This question is to the Student Representative Council, Student Union executives, Faculty executives, Departmental executives, Halls executives, Council of Faculty Presidents, council of Hall chairs, and many other prominent portfolios. Hence, if their excuse is because of their studentship, why then take the role?  Because the concept of leadership as from ages is predicated on double responsibility. It is therefore not wisdom to shy away from what you begged people for when they had other choices. 

As a matter of fact, some stakeholders during some of the protests held recently were not present for any because of the fear and aftermath of what might happen. Their claims may be logical, but if examined carefully, it is not realistic. Imagine that a stakeholder had to exit the school community at a critical time when students’ voices needed to be heard.  Some stakeholders even mount the claim that religion is not tolerant of violence, while some attributed their excuses to the fact that they have to read because examination is near. Meanwhile, one of the acclaimed stakeholders also claims that it is intellectuality to avoid protest, hence, it is advisable to only maintain two out of the three concepts of unionism which are negotiation and consolidation, with confrontation excluded. Of course, the latter part is what the stakeholders of today do not want to hear. 

Furthermore, it is not an hidden reality to see NASU, SSANU, ASUU, NUT, and NLC protest when negotiations and consolidations have failed. Once it is peaceful, it should be well regarded. And thank God for UItes, the previous protests and the recent protests held have accorded our student unionism the recognition of “the father of intellectual unionism”. However, the major stakeholders are weak comrades who flee at the face of their responsibility. The union’s motto which used to be “Aluta Continua – Victoria Ascerta” now seems to have metamorphosed into “Aluta Discontinua – Victory May not be certain”. 

A battle was fought for a period of eleven weeks, and in a night, the resolution by the major stakeholders among students was that the student populace find their way around how to raise the huge amount of money that students are to pay in a period like this when the educational and economical system is heavily crumbling. It is imaginably teary to hear the stories of students who will become dropouts in the long run. it is teary to imagine that after our undergraduate days, we have debts to pay because we made a choice to acquire formal education. Meanwhile, taking debt to be schooled in a school is even not promising, because, in the long run, the country itself is not promising of the outcome of life that will befall everyone. 

Eventually, life happens. The least and the majority of the stakeholders are out of campus. It was ridiculous seeing them pack out with their bags for a compulsory rest, or perhaps hustle mode. However, history will tell of how we failed ourselves and how the stakeholders betrayed the trust that the students have in their competence. At least, the circular of do not pay your school fee yet will end on a bad note.