Emeka Ejikonye was until February 19, 2018, the registrar of Imo State University (IMSU), Owerri. Before his appointment was finally terminated, he was suspended for six-month and placed on half salary for alleged “insubordination, treachery, intransigence and lack of respect for constituted authority.” In this interview with our Assistant Editor, CHINWE MADUAGWU, the former registrar recounts his ordeals and insists; he is still a bonafide staff of IMSU
The beginning of trouble
I assumed the Office of Registrar of Imo State University on March 1, 2015. In very week I assumed office, about two meetings of the University Council Tenders Board were held, followed immediately by a meeting of the Council in plenary to approve the recommendations of the Tenders Board for the award of some contracts under the TETFund Special Intervention. Subsequently, I, in my capacity as the Secretary to the Council, wrote the letters of award of the contracts to the successful companies.
What I didn’t realise was that three of the companies were owned by the same person, Ijeomah Arodiogbu. As at this time, I was new in IMSU and Aloysius Awuzie was Vice-chancellor of the university. By the end of May that year, Prof. Awuzie was suspended by the Government of Imo State and Prof. Mrs. Victoria Obasi was appointed vice-chancellor on June 1, 2015.
The Council now set up a committee to look into TETFund projects. The Committee found out that the three companies had gone away with a total of N300 million mobilization fees paid to them. The cumulative contract amount was N500 million but the companies were paid N300 million without advanced payment guarantee (APG). This caused a lot of heated debate in council and would have led to the suspension of the Bursar but they managed to arrest the situation.
By November, council met and adopted a resolution that I should write to the three companies to remind them of the breach of the contracts because the delivery period for the contracts was six weeks but by then it was going to seven months and the accreditation exercise for which the contracts were awarded had been done in June.
As registrar, I wrote the companies through the addresses they furnished the university. Alas! The courier company returned the letters with the same generic report that those companies were not known at the said addresses. I reported this to the council. Further investigations were carried out and we found out that the contractor was from Arondizuogu, a town in the state. Again council directed that I should write to the man through his village address. This I did and the letters were hand-carried to Arondizuogu. The mail runner met the man’s father and he received and signed acknowledgement copies on behalf of his son.
Obviously, having been traced to his village, the man wrote to the university on separate letterheads of the three companies but with the same content and pleaded for additional two months within which to deliver the goods. The letters were read in council and at no time did council say they didn’t want the goods again. This was in August 2016.
Around October of the same year, council again directed that I should petition the Imo State Commissioner of Police on the issue. I complied promptly and wrote to the Imo State Commissioner of Police. The Police eventually arrested the man and called my attention. I went to the State Intelligence Bureau (SIB), Owerri, and saw the man for the first in my life. I told the police to do their job according to the university’s petition and when they were done, they should write the school formally and council will take it from there.
One thing I remember vividly during this visit was that the man said he had made every arrangement to freight the goods from somewhere in Asia and they would eventually arrive towards the end January of 2017.
My travails
Sometime in late February, very late in the night, my phone rang and the person on the other end, a male voice, said he was bringing the first tranche of the goods to the university. Of course, I told him he shouldn’t do that since the university had petitioned the police on the issue. I, however, advised him to take the goods to the police who were handling the matter and ended the conversation.
About 15 minutes later, my phone rang again and the same voice said he was at the school gate and that I should instruct the Chief Security Officer (CSO) to allow him in and to receive the goods. I told him I would never give such instructions and reiterated my earlier advice to him. I also called the CSO instructing him not to allow those goods into the school.
The next day when I got to my office, I found the IPO one Superintendent of Police, Queen and the CSO waiting for me. The woman pleaded with me that the police didn’t have space to keep the goods and that I should allow them to keep the goods in the school. I told her that wasn’t possible, that the university would not accept the goods in batches.
It was at that point that they disclosed to me that the CSO had allowed the truck into the university the night before. The woman pleaded that they be allowed to keep the goods there at their own risk because I made it clear to her that I would never authorise official receipt of the goods at that point in time.
On further thought, I considered it very necessary to verify the goods. So I called for a copy of the Approval-In-Principle (AIP) wherein TETFund specified the items for supply and found out that the terms used were too technical for me so I requested the CSO and the policewoman to accompany me to the dean of Faculty of Engineering, the primary users of the equipment so that he could verify the items.
When we met the dean, I explained to him all that had transpired and requested him to verify that what was in the truck corresponded with what was in the AIP. In the company of some of his heads of departments and representative of the police and the CSO, we all moved to where the truck was packed and the dean verified the items and I left believing that the items were there at the risk of the police since I hadn’t issued any instructions to anyone to receive the goods.
I didn’t know after I left, the policewoman went to the head of Agricultural Engineering Department, the primary department that will use the goods, Luke Uzoigwe and got him to sign the delivery notes on behalf of the university. I found this out when the police eventually wrote to the university after the recovery of all the goods; with copies of the delivery notes signed by Dr. Uzoigwe, duly attached to the letter.
The unauthorised signing of delivery notes
Let me state clearly here that the man didn’t have the power or authority to sign the delivery notes according to the university’s procurement rules. To sign delivery notes on behalf of the university, there should have been a written instruction. The normal procedure is when a contract is awarded, upon delivery, the contractor takes it to the curator, who having a copy of the contract will confirm the items. After confirmation, he signs the delivery notes and sends the items to the store. Once the items have been delivered to the store, the person in charge will inform the vice-chancellor and registrar that the goods have been delivered. The curator will inform the VC and registrar as well. So when the user department wants to use the goods, they will request from the VC who will instruct the store to release them. So the man didn’t have the right to receive and nobody authorised him to receive the goods.
READ ALSO: Elections sequence: Court orders NASS to suspend action
My illegal suspension
Since the whole contract issue falls within the exclusive domain of council, l had the documents scanned to the Pro-Chancellor, Alex Mbata. The originals were also couriered to him. A few days later when we spoke, the pro-chancellor asked me to query and suspend the HOD. But I didn’t act on the instruction because it was verbal. The instruction ought to have come in writing as I had informed him of what had happened in writing. All this happened in September 2017.
However, November 23 – 24 were fixed for council meetings. On the 23, when I got to the university lodge for breakfast, I saw the contractor having breakfast there, meaning he was lodged there. I brought this to the attention of the pro-chancellor when we met in his room prior to the council meeting and his retort was that I was conspiring with the contractor. I was taken aback by that and stoutly denied it. How could I have been conspiring with the contractor and still report him to the pro-chancellor?
During the meeting, council asked me to make available all documents pertaining to the contracts the previous day. Rather than telling me to invite the dean and HOD who signed the delivery notes, the pro-chancellor asked the VC to do so. I didn’t take it to mean anything then but with the benefit of hindsight, I’m beginning to realize that something must have transpired.
Notwithstanding, I still sent text messages to the gentlemen in question. I didn’t have the contractor’s number so I didn’t invite him.
The next day before the meeting began; I still saw the contractor in a conference with the dean and HOD and assumed they were waiting to be invited to the meeting. When council convened, the dean and HOD were invited in. The pro-chancellor subjected the dean to a barrage of questions to which he answered in the negative. Some of the questions included; were you aware of the contract; did anybody instruct you to receive the goods; did you ask anybody to receive the goods, all to which he answered an emphatic, ‘No‘.
When the HOD was queried, his response was that when the good arrived, I took them to verify the items, seeing me in the company of his dean, the CSO and the policewoman; he was so overwhelmed by the enthusiasm of seeing the brand-new equipment meant for his department. He said he took my presence as authority to receive the goods without any written authorization.
At that juncture, every member of council turned against me with a barrage of indictments. My dilemma was how to exonerate myself without indicting somebody because there was nothing that transpired which I didn’t tell the pro-chancellor who incidentally is the head of the council, though they blamed me for not reporting to the VC.
But by administrative procedure, if an issue arises for the council, I must report it first to the pro-chancellor who is the chairman and not necessarily the VC since the VC is a mere member of the council. So I insisted that I brought everything to the pro-chancellor’s attention. I also reminded him of the conversation we had where he asked me to query and suspend the HOD. At my mention of this, things got worse. It was like why did I try to exonerate myself by trying to indict my boss and that I should have kept quiet.
At that point, council asked me to excuse them and I left the council chamber. All support staff were also asked to leave the chamber. After about an hour or more of deliberation, they invited us back in. The moment I sat down, the pro-chancellor said they had set up a committee and that the committee would get in touch with me that I should excuse them. I stood up and left. Shortly after I left the chamber I got a call from inside that I had been suspended.
Moves to clear my name
The suspension came on a Friday. I immediately reverted to my mentor who advised me on what to do. While I was waiting for Monday to act on the advice, I got a call Sunday night that the University had gone on air to announce my suspension. On Monday, I finally got their letter. By then the news was all over the media; print and electronic. The PRO had informed the media before I was served the letter and I was suspended without being queried in direct contravention of an administrative due process. The letter said I was being suspended for six months and on half salary.
A week after I got the letter, on December 4, 2017, I voluntarily wrote a response to the suspension letter trying to explain the true position of things to members of council and waited for their reaction but they didn’t get back to me.
Being the custodian of the university’s laws, I’m aware that if I must challenge the illegality it must be within a specific time frame. If after three months I didn’t challenge it I would be time-barred. And I was also supposed to give one-month pre-action notice. So by December 8, 2017, I wrote a pre-action notice knowing that by February 24, if I didn’t challenge it in court I won’t be able to do it again.
Perhaps, the notice led the university to invite me to appear on February 5. When I got there, they asked me questions which I answered. At the end of the day, they said they’ll get in touch me. On February 19, I received their letter terminating my appointment. Afterwards, I engaged the services of a law firm to serve the university another pre-action notice based on the termination of my appointment.
Trouble from the contractor
The most surprising thing is that the contractor whom they said I connived with started threatening me through WhatsApp messages that over his dead body would anybody embezzle his money, referring to the balance of N200 million from the contract. When he persisted with the messages, my lawyer advised that I reply and explain things to him and I did that informing him that my appointment with the university had been terminated for conniving with him.
Freedom for the HOD
Meanwhile, the person who signed the delivery notes without authorisation is still in the employ of the University going about his normal duties as an academic staff. Absolutely no action has been taken against him.
Withholding of my statutory entitlements
As a principal officer of the university, I’m entitled to a statutory one-month overseas leave with my family. After two and half years on the job, I had applied for the leave early last year in February 2017, proposing to travel in July. Approval from the VC came in May but by then the time was short for me to process the visas to the countries we wanted to visit. I, therefore, postponed the trip to 2018 but using the time to process the financial aspects to avoid any delays when the time comes. The University Bursar had duly calculated my entitlement to be N18, 015,606.00.
Last year also, I took a trip to York, United Kingdom as part of the Association of Registrars of Nigerian Universities one-week education tour. For that trip, I was entitled to N2.9m but the school said there was no money and pleaded with me to take N1.9 assuring me that the balance of N1 million will be paid upon my return. I also have a cheque of N149, 000. 00, pending in the bursary. Put together, the school is owing me close to N20m. These are all approved monies that are non-contestable.
As I speak, the university has not given me a kobo out of these monies. I have written the bursar asking for these monies, the school is yet to respond.