Joseph Duke, a candidate in the ongoing vice-chancellorship race at the University of Calabar, has challenged the integrity of the selection process, describing it as unconstitutional and skewed to favour a preferred candidate.
In a letter dated June 17 and addressed to the Pro-Chancellor and Chairman of the Governing Council, Duke, through his lawyer Ubong Akpan of Ubong Akpan Chambers, faulted a key requirement in the May 27 advertisement which demanded 10 years of post-professorial experience from aspirants. He said the criterion was not only unprecedented but also breached statutory procedures and university norms.
The letter, with reference number Unical/VC/2025/001, was also sent to the university’s vice-chancellor and registrar, the Minister of Education, and the Attorney General of the Federation.
According to Duke, the 10-year requirement violates the University of Calabar’s traditional benchmark of five to nine years and also contradicts national standards observed by first-generation universities, which typically stipulate five to eight years. He argued that the requirement lacked backing from any Senate-approved statute and was imposed without due process.
He further accused the university of relying on unspecified federal directives, which, he said, undermine the autonomy granted to universities under Section 2a of the Universities (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Amendment) Act of 2003. The move, he warned, could set a dangerous precedent for higher education governance in Nigeria if left unchallenged.
Duke described the selection process as being marred by procedural violations, including lack of quorum during the council’s March meeting, inadequate consultation with the university senate, and internal dissent over the advertised criteria. He said written objections had previously led to the temporary suspension of the advertisement in April, but the revised version still retained the controversial clause.
He called on the governing council to revisit its decision and reduce the post-professorial experience requirement to between six and eight years. He also urged the council to reconvene with a proper quorum, consult the university senate, and reach a documented consensus in line with relevant statutory guidelines.
Duke warned that if the council failed to correct the process and ensure fairness, he would be left with no choice but to seek legal redress at the Federal High Court.
The university has not yet issued a response to the concerns raised.
