FUOYE SUG Accused of Bias, Complicity in VC Crisis, and Sexual Harassment Cover-Up

By Akin Akinsoluga

Oye-Ekiti – May 3, 2025

Picture: SUG President, Abiodun Olorunshola Mary and the Vice Chancellor, Prof. Sunday A ayomi Fasina

The Students’ Union Government (SUG) of the Federal University Oye-Ekiti (FUOYE) is facing mounting criticism over its role in the ongoing crisis engulfing the institution. At the heart of the controversy is the Union’s decision to publicly disown a petition submitted by the National Association of Nigerian Students (NANS) to the Minister of Education, Dr. Tunji Alausa, demanding the removal of the Vice Chancellor, Professor Abayomi Sunday Fasina, and the university’s Governing Council over allegations of administrative misconduct and cover-ups.

In a letter titled “Formal Disclaimer and Refutation of the NANS Petition Against the Vice Chancellor and Governing Council of FUOYE,” the SUG leadership, headed by Abiodun Olorunshola Mary (President) and Lateef Yusuff Ife (Secretary-General), accused NANS of acting under external influence and claimed the petition does not reflect the realities within the institution. The letter went on to affirm the Union’s confidence in the Vice Chancellor and the findings of a Governing Council investigative panel that allegedly cleared the VC of wrongdoing.

However, this defense of the embattled VC has been met with outrage from students, activists, and independent observers who accuse the SUG of gross bias, political manipulation, and betrayal of student interests. Critics have described the Union’s conduct as “shameful” and “compromised,” stating that the leadership has allowed itself to become a mouthpiece for the university administration rather than an advocate for the student body.

A key point of contention is the timing and motive behind the SUG’s vote of confidence on the Vice Chancellor, which was issued even before the conclusion of the Council’s investigation. Observers note that this move was not only premature but also highly inappropriate, considering that the allegations being investigated included sexual harassment, financial impropriety, and abuse of office.

Citing a report by Sahara Reporters in April 2024, students recall that the SUG had passed a vote of confidence in Professor Fasina at the height of the controversy long before the facts had been thoroughly reviewed suggesting that the Union may have acted under administrative pressure or influence.

Further complicating the matter is the use of students in orchestrated protests to support the Vice Chancellor during the height of the investigations. According to reports from The Punch and Channels TV, students were mobilized by the SUG and university management to stage public demonstrations defending the VC and dismissing the allegations against him, despite growing concerns over transparency and due process.

“What we have seen from the SUG is nothing short of betrayal,” said a final-year student of the Faculty of Arts who spoke on condition of anonymity. “Instead of speaking up for victims of sexual harassment, they are protecting the accused. They are more loyal to the VC than to the students they were elected to represent.”

Perhaps the most disturbing element of the SUG’s recent communication to the Minister is the total omission of the sexual harassment allegations against Dr. Agbegbedia and others. These allegations, which reportedly involve the harassment of a female student of the Department of Peace and Conflict Studies, have been a central issue in the NANS petition and have triggered outrage from women’s rights organizations and civil society groups.

Observers say the SUG’s silence on this matter suggests a deliberate attempt to bury the scandal and protect those implicated, further fueling allegations of a cover-up within the institution.

“What kind of student union refuses to speak out against sexual abuse of their own?” asked a representative of a national gender rights coalition. “It’s clear that the SUG has been hijacked. Their refusal to even mention these cases in their letter shows just how far they’ve strayed from their duty.”

There are now growing calls for an external investigation into the conduct of the SUG, with many insisting that their actions have become a serious obstacle to justice and accountability within FUOYE. Student groups are also calling on the Minister of Education not to dismiss the NANS petition, warning that ignoring these serious allegations could erode trust in the government’s oversight of the education sector.

“They’ve reduced the SUG to a puppet institution,” said a former FUOYE SUG executive. “This generation of students must rise and reclaim the Union from those who use it for petty political gain and personal favours.”

As the controversy deepens, pressure is mounting on the university’s governing bodies, federal authorities, and the Nigerian public to demand accountability not only from the university administration but also from a student leadership that many now say has failed its constituents and compromised its integrity.

The weeks ahead are likely to determine whether FUOYE’s internal systems can self-correct or whether a broader intervention will be needed to restore transparency, justice, and credible student representation.