Inside FUOYE: How Loyalty and Cover -Ups Shield Indicted Officials from Visitation Panel Findings

Olawaye Dolapo

Abuja, Nigeria.

The Federal University Oye-Ekiti (FUOYE) is again at the centre of a governance storm after the Federal Ministry of Education’s Visitation Panel (2016–2020) published a report that names multiple irregular appointments and governance failures — including a specific finding on Prof. Bolanle T. Opoola. Instead of resolving the issues, FUOYE management has issued a detailed rebuttal calling the Panel’s findings “faulty and misinformed,” a move that has intensified calls for independent enforcement of the report’s recommendations.

The Panel’s Findings: what the Ministry recorded

The Visitation Panel, acting under the Federal Ministry of Education, documented a pattern of improper recruitment and promotion practices at FUOYE. Its report contains several pointed observations that go to the heart of academic integrity and institutional governance:

Prof. Opoola B. T 

“Dr Bolanle T. Opoola, who was a Chief Lecturer in a College of Education, was appointed a Senior Lecturer and immediately assessed and promoted to Reader in a manner that appears unmerited and clearly without following the due process.”

(Report of the Visitation to the Federal University Oye-Ekiti, 2016–2020 — Federal Ministry of Education.)

The Panel did not treat Opoola’s case as an isolated lapse. It recorded multiple “wrong placements upon employment or promotions”, naming other staff whose appointments or grades lacked the procedural and meritocratic safeguards required by university regulations and NUC guidelines. The report also highlighted systemic governance issues — including Council meetings regularly held off-campus, an overly empowered Vice-Chancellor, and administrative instability in the Registry (with five registry heads between 2016 and 2020, three of whom acted beyond the statutory limit).

Crucially, the Panel recommended a forensic audit of FUOYE’s accounts and a reassessment of all staff promotions and employments between 2016 and 2020, explicitly linking irregular promotions to weaknesses in financial and administrative oversight.

(Public source: Report of the Visitation to the Federal University Oye-Ekiti, Ekiti State (2016–2020) — https://education.gov.ng/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/FEDERAL-UNIVERSITY-OYE-EKITI-EKITI-STATE-Report-2016-2020.pdf)

Management’s rebuttal: a line-by-line denial

Shortly after the report became public, FUOYE’s Registrar issued a detailed press release contesting the Panel’s conclusions. The Registrar’s statement went beyond a general denial and addressed the Panel’s claims point by point:

On Prof. Opoola’s promotion: the Registrar insisted that “it is false and misleading to suggest that Prof. Bolanle Opoola’s appointment and promotion did not follow due process. His progression complied with all laid-down rules of the University, including external assessments and Council approvals.”

On the broader allegation of irregular promotions: the Registrar affirmed that “FUOYE has consistently upheld the integrity of its appointment and promotion procedures. Every academic promotion during the period under review passed through the mandatory processes as stipulated by NUC guidelines.”

On the credibility of the Panel: the Registrar asserted that “the Visitation Panel’s findings in this respect were faulty, misinformed, and did not reflect the actual records of the University. For the avoidance of doubt, there was no special favour granted to Prof. Opoola or any other staff in violation of due process.”

That firm rebuttal — issued in the very public tone of institutional defence — sets up a stark contradiction: a Federal Ministry report documenting specific irregularities on one hand, and on the other hand a university register asserting procedural compliance and impugning the Panel’s credibility.

Why the contradiction matters!

The dispute is not merely about reputations. The Panel’s findings and recommendations touch on several higher-stakes issues:

Academic integrity - Irregular promotions undermine meritocracy, discourage genuine scholarship, and distort career progression for academics who follow the rules.

Financial accountability - The Panel’s link between governance lapses and the need for a forensic audit suggests that personnel irregularities may be symptomatic of wider financial mismanagement.

Institutional governance - Repeated off-campus Council meetings, Registry instability, and a Vice-Chancellor granted excessive latitude create an environment where procedural safeguards can be ignored or overridden.

Public trust - When a federally commissioned panel issues findings and the same university’s management publicly disputes those findings in categorical terms, the public is left uncertain which account to trust — the government’s investigator or the institution under scrutiny.

On the ground: consequences and context

Stakeholders such as academic staff, students, and unions says the Panel’s findings explain a range of downstream problems at FUOYE: disputed recruitments, rising staff grievances, threats to programme accreditation, and controversial financial decisions that have strained the university’s internally generated revenue.

Observers point to other controversies cropping up since the period covered by the Panel, large overseas trips, disputed leave payments, and high-value property transactions, and argue these cumulative issues demonstrate why the Panel’s recommended forensic audit cannot be ignored.

What now? Calls for independent enforcement

Given the gravity of the Panel’s documented findings and FUOYE management’s categorical rebuttal, several paths forward are now being urged by concerned stakeholders:

The Federal Ministry of Education should publicly reconcile the Visitation Panel’s recommendations with FUOYE’s rebuttal and set a clear timeline for enforcement.

A forensic audit of FUOYE’s finances (as called for in the Panel report) should be commissioned immediately and conducted by an independent team with published terms of reference.

The reassessment of promotions and appointments between 2016 and 2020 should proceed transparently, with appeals processes made available and outcomes publicly reported.

If evidence of procedural breaches or financial impropriety is confirmed, the appropriate regulatory and anti-corruption bodies (NUC, ICPC, EFCC) should be notified to take legal and administrative action.

The Opoola episode, now firmly documented in a federal visitation report and publicly contested by FUOYE’s Registrar has become a litmus test for how Nigeria handles university governance failures. Will a government-mandated investigation be allowed to run its course, or will institutional denials and narrative management nullify the work of official oversight?

Until the Ministry enforces the Panel’s recommendations and ensures transparent implementation, FUOYE risks remaining trapped in the same cycle: documented indictments on paper, management denials in public, and little or no remedial action to restore institutional integrity.

Source: Report of the Visitation to the Federal University Oye-Ekiti, Ekiti State (2016–2020) — Federal Ministry of Education.

🔗 https://education.gov.ng/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/FEDERAL-UNIVERSITY-OYE-EKITI-EKITI-STATE-Report-2016-2020.pdf