The Nation Newspaper

Tag: sanctions

  • SEC sanctions: Oando goes to Appeal Court

    SEC sanctions: Oando goes to Appeal Court

    •Oil firm welcomes new SEC DG

    •’Gwarzo was compromised’

    Oando PLC has challenged at the Appeal Court the findings and sanctions on it by the Securities & Exchange Commission ( SEC ), following an alleged investigation, which began in May 2017.

    SECs had placed technical suspension on Oando PLC shares and ordered a forensic audit into the company’s affairs.

    A statement published on Oando’s website on Friday states that in addition to legal action, it has written several petitions to various arms of the government expressing concern at the way the SEC under the leadership of ex-Director General, Mounir Gwarzo, managed the investigation and their belief is that the investigation was biased, did not follow due process and lacked fairness.

    The company added that a recent leak of the signed September 18, 2017 report of the Technical Committee that was set up by Gwarzo to investigate them is further proof that under his leadership actions taken by the commission were illegal, invalid and calculated to prejudice the business of the company.

    Gwarzo set up a five-man committee to investigate the company and on conclusion present a report with findings and recommendations for sanctions. The report shows that the committee found that Oando had satisfactorily responded to all the issues raised by the petitioners and had further recommended that the responses provided by the company and its independent external auditors be forwarded to the petitioners for their information and further escalation if they deemed it necessary.

    The report makes no recommendation for the shares of the company to be suspended or for a forensic audit of the company to be conducted.

    Instead, the committee recommended that certain unresolved issues be forwarded to the Securities and Investment Services (SIS) department of the Commission to determine whether there was in fact a breach of the ISA or the SEC Rules.

    On 27 September, 2017, the Committee of the House of Representatives on Capital Markets and Institutions summoned Gwarzo and mandated him to complete his investigation into Oando and issue a report within two weeks of that meeting.

    They also requested that they be sent a copy of the report of the investigation, its findings and recommendations.

    “It is interesting to note that Gwarzo failed to inform the House of Representatives that at the time the meeting was held, the signed Technical Committee report had already been submitted.  It wasn’t until a month after, on Wednesday, 18 October 2017 that the SEC published a statement on its website detailing alleged infractions committed by Oando and weighty penalties, which included a directive to the Nigerian Stock Exchange (NSE) for a 48-hour full suspension followed by a technical suspension in the trading of Oando shares and for a forensic audit into the affairs of the company to be conducted,” the website explained.

    Against this background, the company cites a multitude of other reasons why it believes the investigation was biased and thus flawed.

    Among the reasons were the fact that some of the actions taken by the then DG were against SECs rules and regulations.

    Under the SEC rules, the Administrative Proceedings Committee (APC) is the committee empowered to look into matters of the nature of which the petitioners alleged.

    However, Gwarzo did not utilise this committee but instead set up a Technical Committee and later a Special Task Force to investigate Oando.

    SEC laws state that the DG does not have the legal or administrative authority to set up committees; only the board can do this.

    However, at the time of the investigation, SEC had no board and even if it did, there was a committee already in place that could investigate the company.

    There is also the legality of SEC investigating a petition brought by an indirect shareholder and one that is currently in arbitration when SECs rules categorically state that it will not consider any complaints regarding matters that are already the subject of arbitration or court proceedings.

    In Oando’s statement, it cites the example of MRS Oil and Gas PLC, where the SEC stopped investigating and a call for a forensic audit into MRS when it was brought to the regulators attention that there were ongoing arbitration proceedings in France between Petroci Holdings and MRS.

    The company and its shareholders have continuously raised concerns at the public nature of the investigation. At the company’s AGM in August, shareholders had spoken out about the substantial amount of media attention the investigation was receiving.

    According to the Group Chief Executive Officer (GCE), Oando PLC, Wale Tinubu: “The SEC investigation and continued media leaks have had a deleterious impact on market confidence, our share price and a negative impact on other critical stakeholders.”

    The statement makes mention of further bias by SEC agreeing to meet with the petitioners but not Oando during the course of the investigation despite several requests by the company for a meeting.

    The reclassification of one of the petitioners, Ansbury Inc. as a whistleblower despite the fact that Ansbury brought its petition to the SEC as an indirect Oando shareholder and previous SEC investigations, ie Ikeja Hotels, where the SEC did not suspend the shares of the company when it embarked on a forensic audit.

    More recently when SEC released its alleged findings and sanctions, the company was quick to respond and point out to the SEC and the public that the alleged infractions all have specific SEC penalties, none of them whether singularly or together warrant the suspension of the trading of Oando shares or the institution of a forensic audit.

    The company’s most ardent objection to the forensic audit is the fact that SEC has itself said it needs to do an audit to confirm its weighty findings.  It is unjust to make a company pay N160 million to be investigated so the regulator can confirm whether its findings are indeed correct or true.  It begs the question how did the regulator come about its weighty findings?

    The company’s biggest concern is that because all actions to date have been illegal and biased then a forensic audit could also be biased.

    This is not the first legal action taken by the company against SEC on this investigation but its recent actions is evidence that it won’t back down and will fight SEC until justice prevails.

    Consequent to the indefinite suspension of Gwarzo on allegations of corruption by the Minister of Finance, the SEC had notified Oando that it would commence the forensic audit with effect from December 6, 2017. According to the company, the appointed auditors are yet to approach the company to commence the audit.

    Oando concluded the statement by expressing willingness to comply with the directives of the commission.

    The company said: “Despite our objections to the forensic audit, the company would like to reiterate that we recognise and respect the authority of the commission and in the spirit of cooperation, transparency and full disclosure, the company will comply with the directives of the commission whilst reserving our legal rights in this matter.

    “Accordingly, we welcome the appointment of Dr. Abdul Zubair as the Acting Director-General (ADG) of the SEC and see this as an opportunity for the regulator to act independently and for a new and enduring relationship to be established.  We trust that he will investigate the matters raised in an independent and transparent manner and look forward to his support in ensuring due process is indeed followed.”

    The company reiterated that it recognises and respects the authority of the SEC and is hopeful that a new and independent DG will act in the best interests of the company and its 274,000 shareholders.

  • Lagos to traders: vacate roads or face sanctions

    The Lagos State Government has warned traders, particularly those in Ogba Market and its environs, to vacate the roads or face heavy sanctions.

    It said no one was permitted to convert the roads, their medians, set-backs and walkways to markets or street shops.

    Commissioner for the Environment Dr. Babatunde Adejare stated this while on inspection of the Abibatu Mogaji Sunday Market, Oluwole Mini-Market and Ogba Retail Market.

    Adejare lamented that despite   appeals from the government, some traders were still violating the environmental laws. He said the government would longer tolerate lawlessness by any trader.

    ‘’Our focus is to maintain sanity in our markets, now dotted with all manners of shanties and illegal structures, such as attachments to tenements and containers,’’ he said.

    He urged owners of street shops to fence them off the road, if they must continue to exist as that is one way to reduce the havocs to the environment.

    He warned that if the fence was not erected within a time, the street shops would be demolished and the tenants penalised, according to the laws.

    Ogba-Oluwole Community Estate Association Chairman Mr Lateef Abass pledged support to the government.

  • Quit order: Southern leaders seek sanctions against Arewa youths

    Some southern leaders yesterday urged the Federal Government to address the quit order issued by some Arewa youth groups to the Igbo to vacate the North.

    They spoke after a meeting at Chief Ayo Adebanjo’s house in Lagos. It was attended by leaders of Ohanaeze Ndigbo, led by its President Nnia Nwodo, Gen Alani Akinrinade, Chief Albert Horsefall and former Chief of General Staff Commodore Ebitu Ikiweý (rtd).

    The leaders said the ultimatum was been handled with levity, adding that it was a threat to Southern Nigeria.

    The communique of the meeting read by Mr. Yinka Odumakin, said: “We the people of Southern Nigeria, comprising Southeast, Southwest and Southsouth of Nigeria, decided to come together to forge a common and formidable front and sustenance of sound principles of national development ,equity, fairness, social justice and political emancipation.

    “The meeting held against the backdrop of the ultimatum given by the Arewa youths to the people of Southeast and by extension to all southerners to vacate the North by October 1, 2017 and the refusal of the Nigerian state to activate the law against any of them, giving us the impression that these youths are not acting on their own, but with the backing of their establishment.

    “We consider the need to avert the impending danger arising from the ultimatum given by the Arewa youths.

    “We agreed that there is a growing demand by our people and other Nigerians to form a stronger federation in which principles and practice of true federalism are upheld. We observe that the cry for self-determination will continue unabated and become much more stringent unless the Federal Government sincerely address the issues of restructuring of Nigeria.

    “We, therefore, resolve that we reject the attempt to, reduce the current crisis in Nigeria, flowing from the unresolved nationality question to an Igbo and North affair. The meeting, therefore, insists that any further discussion on this crisis should be between the entire South and the North of Nigeria. The Southeast is advised to consider any further meeting where the Southwest and Southsouth are not involved as southern Nigeria because the issues involved affects all of us.

    “We also demand that Arewa youths and their sponsors must withdraw the quit notice given to the people of the Southeast as failure to do so, will be taken as an ultimatum given to the entire Southern Nigeria to quit their region and any attack against anybody from the South, will be considered an attack against the Southern Nigeria.

    “We advise the Federal Government to take seriously and live up to the primary responsibility of any government, which is to protect the lives and property of every citizen of Nigeria wherever they may reside.”

    The leaders said the consistent attack by Fulani herdsmen on communities in the Southwest was heating the polity, noting that government must stem the tide.

    “Now, we also resolved on the need for the restructuring of Nigeria and to uphold the principles of true federalism as agreed by the founding fathers of Nigeria and practiced effectively in the years before the first military coup in Nigeria.

    “Now we also resolved on the need for the restructuring of Nigeria and to uphold the principles of true federalism as agreed by the founding fathers of Nigeria and practised effectively in the years before the military took over power in Nigeria.

    “We affirm and resolve in the implementation of the report of the 2014 National Conference aimed at complete transformation and restructuring of our country and to build and confederate Nigeria unity through peaceful and harmonious unity, progress and genuine development.”

  • Sanctions await BPE Directors, others in ethics’ code

    Directors of the Bureau of Public Enterprises (BPE) and other senior officials are to face stiff sancttions, including dismissal under a new set of rules in its code of ethics scheduled for launch tomorrow.

    Under its provision, BPE directors and others will be subjected to investigation by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Crimes Commission (ICPC).

    A source at the Presidency, said the sanctions are part of measures put in place to tackle corruption in the Code of Ethics that the new Director-General, Alex Okoh has instituted.

    Enforcement and compliance with the code by directors and alternate directors shall be part of the monitoring mandate of the Anti-Corruption and Transparency Unit (ACTU) that the ICPC is expected to inaugurate tomorrow.

    According to the source, who asked not to be identified, “the BPE has instituted a code of ethics for directors and alternate directors representing BPE on boards of privatised enterprises on behalf of the Federal Government of Nigeria.”

    It was however learnt that the code of ethics applies to the directors sitting on the board of privatised enterprises in which the federal government has equity, or interest and any such person that may be nominated to act as alternate director of the directors’ behalf.

    According its provision, “in the event that the director/alternate directors violate the terms of this code of ethics, the bureau shall impose appropriate disciplinary measures of impropriety as contained in S.14 of the BPE staff manual.

    “This would be without prejudice to the penalties imposed under the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act 2000; Economic and Financial Crimes Commission Act, 2004; and any other relevant laws.

    “In addition to sanctioning regime contained in Clause 14 of the BPE Staff Manual, the Director shall withdraw the nomination of  Alternate Director found culpable of violating this Code of Ethics.”

    The Director General had on assumption of office on April 21, said  his administration would also work to sustain the positive image of the Bureau while at the same time strive to change the negative perception held by some people about the BPE in the execution of its mandate.

    Okoh promised to step up the post-privatization monitoring activities of the Bureau to ensure that owners of privatised enterprises live up to the covenants they signed with the Bureau so that Nigerians could derive maximum benefits from the privatized enterprises.

    The code of ethics for director/alternate directors that he has now instituted are that they (directors) “Report to the Bureau any concerns about unethical behaviour, actual or suspected fraud or violation of the Enterprise’s Code of Conduct Policy.

    “Act within his authority to protect the legitimate interest of the Enterprise, the FGN, Shareholders and its Employees.

    Where he has concerns about the running of the Enterprise or a proposed action, ensure that these are addressed by the Board and to the extent that they are not resolved, insist that the concerns are recorded in the minutes of the Board meeting.

    “Refrain from intruding in administrative issues that are the responsibility of the management of the Enterprise, except to monitor the results and ensure that procedures are consistent with Board Policy.

    “The Director/Alternate Directors shall ensure that their interaction with other Board members and representatives of the company before a Board meeting or a Board function are above board with no real or perceived indication of compromise on his part.

    “The Director/Alternate Directors shall ensure that decisions on aspects that are provided for in the acquisition documents with the Bureau must be adhered to. Where there is insistence of going against enshrined provisions in divestiture Agreements, the Director/Alternate Directors must insist on being recorded as disagreeing with the decision.

  • Unilorin and ASUU’s ‘sanctions’

    An another desperate attempt to truncate the steady academic progress being recorded at the University of Ilorin, the National Secretariat of the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) has unilaterally imposed what could simply be described as ill-advised, mischievous and vexatious sanctions on this flagship of the nation’s education sector.

    Following a meeting of its National Executive Council (NEC) at the Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, mid-January, the Union sought to ostracise the University of Ilorin from the nation’s academic community, citing flimsy and baseless “acts of lawlessness, arbitrariness, violation of human and trade union rights, and persecution of loyal members.”

    The Union alleged that “contrary to the law and despite the ruling of the National Industrial Court, the University has continued to prevent the Union from functioning on its campus.” It stated further that Unilorin “has also continued to forcefully collect check-off money from academics of the university in the name of the Union without remitting it to the Union.”

    Having charged the University with these offences and convicted it on all counts, the Union went ahead to impose the sanctions on the University administration.  According to it, “For the duration of the sanctions, academic staff of the University of Ilorin will no longer enjoy the cooperation, collaboration or participation of academics of other Nigerian public universities, in (sundry) areas of academic and related activities.” These include teaching, research and supervision of students; setting, moderating or assessment of examinations; external assessment for professional cadre appointments or promotions; sabbatical, visiting, part-time and adjunct appointments; accreditation of institutions, colleges, programmes and courses; collaborative research; attendance of learned conferences, society workshops, seminars and other related activities; peer review of journal articles and patronage of journals; and so forth.

    From the tone and intent of its unilateral ‘sanctions’, it is clear that the National ASUU is deliberately pursuing a belligerent agenda, having failed serially in its bid to hijack the Unilorin Branch of the Union for its anointed gangs, who constitute less than one percent of the academic staff of the University.

    Since the ASUU-orchestrated crisis erupted in 2001, the Union has consistently put up a belligerent posture, spurning all forms of reconciliatory moves. Its intention, since then, has been to destabilise the University of Ilorin.

    The Union unwittingly exposed its main motive with its complaint that the University has “continued to forcefully collect check-off money from academics of the university … without remitting it to the Union.” It is becoming obvious that members’ check-off dues are the main grouse. For,  in one breath, you claim you have suspended the Unilorin Branch of the Union and in another you still expect check-off due remittance from the same suspended Branch? In any case, it is on record that at the outset of the crisis, more than 95 per cent of the academic staff of the University resolved to discontinue the payment of check-off dues to ASUU National and decided, instead, to pay a percentage of their salaries as administrative charge to the local branch. This decision was duly communicated to the University management for the purpose of deducting this from source. And from this administrative charge, the ASUU leadership in the University has been able to build a befitting secretariat for the Union, a feat which was never on the agenda of the previous executive committees headed by the lackeys of these anarchists.

    Again, the allegation of lawlessness levelled against the University administration is spurious. How can Unilorin be lawless when it obeyed all court judgments and dutifully carried out the judicial order to reabsorb all the disengaged lecturers. Their accumulated salaries were paid in full despite the fact that most of them were already in regular employment in some other places.

    The call on academic staff of other public universities to boycott all Unilorin-based journals as well as the embargo on the acceptance of articles from Unilorin academics by journals of other universities for peer review and publication clearly shows the Union as simply anti-intellectual. When has trade union membership become a pre-requisite for featuring in an academic journal? Or are we now to believe that any academic, who is not an ASUU member, cannot publish in an academic journal?

    In the same vein, ASUU’s call on academics from other universities not to come to the University of Ilorin for sabbatical, visiting, part-time and adjunct appointments as well as the embargo on Unilorin academics who may want undertake similar exercises in other universities runs counter to the principle of reciprocity on which universities all over the world thrive. Not only is the University of Ilorin a hot cake, for sabbatical,  visiting, part-time and adjunct applicants, the management, as a matter of sustained policy, actively encourages its academic staff to go for these appointments even outside the country and they are widely accepted. Would these self-conceited unionists then agree to recall some of their members who are currently on sabbatical at the University of Ilorin?

    It should be pointed out that this is not the first time these people would be exhibiting their anti-intellectual stance, as they have, several times in the past, disrupted semester examinations; petitioned the Medical and Dental Council of Nigeria, in 2002, over allegations that the University violated academic regulations and minimum standards in the training of its medical students; unilaterally banned external examiners from moderating the final year examinations and projects of Unilorin students in 2001; and serially embarrassed members of our academic staff who went for one engagement or another in a couple of universities. All these antics were aimed at arm-twisting the University and truncating its rising profile.

    It is on record that the University administration has continued to broker peace between the local branch and the National ASUU with a view to promoting a peaceful campus and fostering harmonious management-labour relations. Times without number, successive Vice-Chancellors of the institution, and the incumbent Prof. AbdulGaniyu Ambali in particular, have facilitated reconciliatory meetings but as soon as the issue of popular election is mentioned and the need for both parties to go to the Congress and test their respective popularity in a popular democratic contest, the National-backed faction often balks.

    The University Management is hereby calling on the Federal Government and all lovers of education in the country to call these fellows to order because they are transgressing the limit allowed by trade unionism. They should be told in clear and unambiguous language that they do not possess the power to sanction a federal University that is being run with the tax payers’ money, a University that has contributed, in no small measure, to the upliftment of the higher education system in the country.

     

    • Akogun is the Head of Corporate Affairs Unit, University of Ilorin

  • Fed Govt sanctions 313 mining firms

    No fewer than 313 mining companies have been sanctioned by the Federal Government over non fulfilment of environmental obligations.

    The Director, Mines Environmental Compliance Department, Ministry of Mines and Steel Development, Mr. Salim Salaam, stated this in Abuja.

    Salaam said the operators were issued sanction letters on March 20 for failing to conduct Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), Environmental Protection and Rehabilitation Programme (EPRP) and the Community Development Agreement (CDA).

    He said four of the companies affected were given “stop work” order, adding that the ministry had warned them severally but they refused to comply with the environmental obligations.

    Salaam said five companies’ licences were revoked over failure to comply with the environmental obligations despite several notices issued by the ministry.

    “One out of the five companies is a foreign one in Bauchi, three in Cross River and nne in Oyo State; all their licences have been revoked completely,” he said.

    He said, however, that 20 mining companies were issued warning letters to comply with the Mining Act to avoid revocation.

    He said the ministry had decided not to renew licences of the remaining 284 mining companies, except the Minister, Dr Kayode Fayemi give them another chance to fulfil all environmental requirements.

    He said that some of the defaulters did not conduct Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) before commencing operations, adding that this could be dangerous to the host communities’ health and cause environmental degradations.

    EIA is a study being conducted by mining operators to ascertain in advance the impact of the project on the environment and on the lives of the host communities.

    He also explained that some conducted EIA but refused to fulfill the CDA of the host communities and the EPRP.

    “Mining operators are mandated to conduct EPRP, according to Section 119 of the Nigerian Mining Act. The CDA is also mandatory under Section 116 of the Act for mining operators to sign an agreement with host communities on what to do to improve their livelihoods. The idea of conducting EIA is to proffer mitigation measures against mining impacts before commencing operation,’’ he said.

    He said the problems in the Niger Delta were as a result of CDA as the communities were complaining that oil companies were conducting exploration and extraction but refused to meet their needs.

    He added that the CDA was provided as a measure in the Mining Act for mining operators to fulfill their obligations socially and economically to their host communities to avoid problems.

    Salam said the ministry sanctioned no fewer than 20 mining companies over non-compliance with its laws and regulations.

     

  • Buhari orders sanctions for Change begins with me speech mix-up

    Buhari orders sanctions for Change begins with me speech mix-up

    President Muhammadu Buhari has ordered that appropriate disciplinary action be taken against those responsible for a wrongful insertion in his speech delivered at the recent launch of the ‘Change Begins with Me’ campaign.

    A newspaper columnist had yesterday drawn attention to the similarity of a sentence in the Buhari speech with a paragraph in US President Barack Obama’s 2008 Victory speech.

    The President’s  Senior Special Assistant on Media and Publicity, Garba Shehu,admitted  yesterday that the similarity was too striking to be dismissed  as a coincidence.

    “There was a mistake by an overzealous staff and we regret that this has happened,” Shehu said in a statement.

    “Already, a Deputy Director in the Presidency has accepted responsibility for the insertion of the contentious paragraph.

    “This serious oversight will be investigated thoroughly and appropriate sanction meted.

    “The Presidency wishes to state in the clearest possible terms that it regrets this unfortunate incident and will ensure that this does not happen again.”

    President Buhari also urged Nigerians to look beyond the incident and focus on the message of change which the country needed to restore her cherished value systems.

  • NDIC pushes for stiffer sanctions over non-performing loans

    NDIC pushes for stiffer sanctions over non-performing loans

    The Nigeria Deposit Insurance Corporation (NDIC) has expressed concern over the increasing wave of non-performing insider loans in various banks and its consequence on the stability of the banking system.

    Its Managing Director/Chief Executive, Alhaji Umaru Ibrahim, spoke while receiving the new President/ Chairman of Council of the Chartered Institute of Bankers of Nigeria (CIBN), Prof Segun Ajibola and some of its executive members who visited the NDIC’s senior management in Abuja.

    According to Ibrahim, the rise in non-performing insider loans poses credibility questions which can erode public confidence in the banking system.

    He called for strict compliance with the code of conduct and a review of laws and regulations to provide stiffer penalties for directors who take advantage of their positions and failed to pay back their loans.

    The NDIC chief observed that casual workers accounted for about 25 per cent of the industry’s workforce,  which has a negative impacted the industry.

    Ibrahim lamented the practice of some banks that assign sensitive roles to casual workers, thereby exposing the banking industry to cases of fraud and forgeries.

    On rationalisation by banks, Ibrahim urged the banks to exercise caution to avoid industrial unrest in the industry.

    He urged the CIBN to intervene by advising its members on the aim of the rationalisation which should be to weed out bad eggs from the industry.

    He said the NDIC would continue to partner the CIBN and other professional bodies to achieve effective capacity building among its staff.

    According to him,  77 staff members of the Corporation  are undergoing the Bangor/CB MBA programme which started three years ago.

    The Bangor/CB MBA programme is an initiative of the NDIC, the CIBN and the Bangor University, Scotland where staff of the Corporation undergo up to 24 months training programme and graduate with dual certification: an MBA and Chartered Banker of Scotland.

    Fourteen members of staff had already graduated from the programme.

    He further requested the CIBN to fast track the accreditation of the Corporation’s Training Academy and the introduction of the deposit Insurance System (DIS) in the institute’s curricula in order to broaden the scope of professionalism in the banking industry.

    Ajibola praised the Corporation for its contribution to stability in the banking system.

  • Rector threatens sanctions against erring lecturers

    The Rector Akanu Ibiam Federal Polytechnic Uwana (AIFPU), Ven Ogbonnia Ibe-Enwo, has threatened to deal with any lecturer caught demanding undue financial reward or sexually assaulting the students.

    Ibe-Enwo gave the warning during institution’s 35th matriculation.

    According to him, appropriate measures have been taken to eradicate or curtail extortion, adding that  sanctions will be meted out on defaulters.

    He urged the Federal Government to review the Federal Polytechnic Act, noting that the move would revolutionalise polytechnic education and ensure the production of manpower from bachelor of technology to doctorate of technology.

    “The review will also enable us be at par with universities while allowing our core mandates to remain.

    The rector noted that the move will ensure productivity and a level playing ground for all members of the sector such that they would attain the peak of their careers.

    “We should abrogate all dichotomies militating against productivity, as obtained in the career progression between the university and polytechnic graduates,” he said.

    He said the institution matriculating 6,025 students for the 2015/16 academic session, in 30 departments spreading across six schools.

    He noted that 3, 911 students were granted admission in National Diploma (ND) programmes, while 2, 114 students were offered admission into Higher National Diploma (HND) programmes.

    He added that the institution was collaborating with the Federal University of Technology (FUTO) Owerri and the Michael Okpara University of Agriculture (Umudike) Abia, to award Bachelor of Science Degrees

    He said: “We frown at laziness and examination misconduct which negate the objectives of parents and guardians in sponsoring you.”

    He enjoined them to shun cultism and its related activities as its membership pitches is not tolerated in this institution.

  • Babalola: I won’t impose financial sanctions on students

    Babalola: I won’t impose financial sanctions on students

    Non-receipt of legal advice stalls case

    The founder of the Afe Babalola University (ABUAD), Aare Afe Babalola, has promised not to impose financial sanctions on  students to repair the damage done to the university’s property.

    Some students went on the rampage on February 7, destroying university property.

    Babalola, at a meeting yesterday with ABUAD Parents Teachers Consultative Forum (PTCF), said  taking the step would “unjustifiably make the innocent pay for the sins of the guilty”.

    Babalola said: “I have made up my mind not to impose financial sanctions on all the students as it is the practice in some other institutions .

    “It has to be appreciated that those behind the February 7 disturbances were less than 200 of a total student population of 6,000.

    “It will, therefore, be unfair, unjust and inequitable for me and/or the university to ask every student to pay for the sins and misconduct of just a few of them.

    “If I do it, God will punish me. But I know for sure that the Almighty God, who provided the resources for me to establish the university, is still on the throne.

    “He will provide the money to replace and repair the facilities damaged.

    “I established this university for a purpose: to make a difference, to show how a university should be run and to make the students better than I am.

    “But what a negligible few  have done will not and cannot make us lose focus, neither will it discourage us.

    “We have put our hands on the plough of quality and functional education, we will not look back.”

    The PTCF praised the founder for not closing down the university.

    It eulogised Babalola for his magnanimity.

    PTCF’s Vice-President Prof Olusegun Oladimeji argued that closing down the university would have led to disruption of academic programmes.

    Oladimeji added that it was the unwarranted closure of many a public university  that has made students spend between seven and eight years four a four-year programme.

    The don, therefore, urged higher institutions, public or private, to take a cue from Babalola’s uncommon maturity and understanding.

    He thanked those who empathised and sympathised with the university in its hour of need.

    The non-receipt of legal advice from the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) yesterday stalled the hearing of a criminal case against 31 students at an Ado-Ekiti Chief Magistrate’s Court.

    The court presided over by Chief Magistrate Soji Adegboye adjourned the case till Friday, following a request by the police prosecutor, Sgt. Caleb Leramo.

    Sixteen of the 31 students,  were returned to the Ado-Ekiti prison custody as their parents and guardians cried when the prison vehicle left the court.

    Adegboye had earlier stood down hearing to await  legal advice from the DPP, which did not come after the court resumed.

    Leramo then moved application for a short adjournment to wait further for legal advice, expressing optimism that it would have come at the next adjourned date.

    He said: “There is no legal advice yet. I will, therefore, request for a short adjournment, hoping the advice would have arrived by then.”

    The prosecutor also revealed that peace moves are ongoing between the parents and the university authorities.