Controversy Surrounds Suspension of Deputy Dean at Federal University Oye Ekiti
The recent suspension of Dr. Banji Olariye, the Deputy Dean of Students at the Federal University Oye Ekiti, has ignited a heated debate. Olariye asserts that the charges of extortion leading to his suspension were premeditated, suggesting that the university’s current administration sought his removal since February.
Dr. Sunday Sanu, the university spokesperson, countered Olariye’s claims, categorizing the allegations as false and emphasizing the institution’s commitment to maintaining integrity.
Olariye’s suspension was announced alongside that of Olanrewaju Ogunjobi, the Director-General of the Department of Educational Technology, Innovation and Entrepreneurship, and James Adio, the President of the Students’ Union Government. The university accuses the trio of collecting N1,000 from each first-year student without proper authorization.
During an exclusive interview, Olariye expressed his belief that the suspension was more about undermining his credibility than addressing the allegations against him. He noted that the current administration had made it clear from the start that they did not want to collaborate with him, indicating a lack of support for the appointment of the current deputy prime minister.
According to Olariye, he had planned to resign as vice president of students at the end of July, coinciding with the conclusion of a political appointee’s term. He described the conflict regarding startup fees as stemming from a disagreement between the Directorate General of Entrepreneurship and the Dean of Students, clarifying that he had no official role in the program.
He explained that his involvement only began when the Dean of Students, Professor Temitope Babalola, solicited his assistance to resolve issues over the collection of fees. Following discussions with the students’ union and faculty executives, he reached out to the head of entrepreneurship, addressing the delays in fund distribution.
Olariye emphasized that he directed student leaders to recover outstanding contributions, successfully retrieving approximately N2.5 million. He clarified that, while he facilitated communication regarding the funds, he was later summoned to a commission of inquiry concerning the extortion charges. He refuted claims that a mere N35,000 was given to students, asserting that the full amount of N1 million was indeed distributed.
Despite these assertions, Olariye, along with the Entrepreneurship Center director and the SUG chairman, faced suspension on June 10. He voiced concerns that other officials directly involved with the funds were not included in the inquiry. Criticizing the university for announcing suspensions before completing investigations, he suggested that his character had been unfairly maligned, claiming that he has always supported students financially from his own resources.
In light of these developments, he has appealed the suspension and urged the governing council president to ensure a full investigation preceding any disciplinary actions. Complicating matters further, he pointed out the reinstatement of the SUG chairman, raising questions about the rationale behind his own sanctions in contrast to those applied to fellow officials.
Amidst this turmoil, an anonymous senior school management member indicated that the inquiry committee misled the administration. The source claimed Olariye’s office was contacted for intervention in the crisis and had advised seeking alternative funding strategies.
In rebuttal, Sanu emphasized that the university’s actions adhered strictly to its anti-extortion policy. He affirmed that the leadership had clearly communicated the zero-tolerance stance on misconduct since the current vice-chancellor’s commencement in office, further asserting that a prima facie case had been established against Olariye prior to disciplinary measures.
Sanu dismissed allegations of political maneuvering as unfounded, asserting that the evidence against Olariye was substantial and corroborated by the findings of the investigative committee. He referenced a previous case involving the former student union president, contrasting it with the current situation, and declared that the university’s response was purely based on the necessity to uphold moral standards.
