By Ibrahim Oladosu
Campus electioneering process has always been characterized by trial and errors. However, in a bid to avoid mistakes, the University through its electoral committee upgraded the requirements (academic) which aspirants must possess in order to be qualified to run for any office in the Students’ Union. Of importance is here is on not having CGPA grade less than Second Class Upper for aspirants of the Executive offices while that for the office of the Students’ Representative Council is Second Class lower. It is quite amusing that the Executive council’s requirement is higher than the legislative council translating to the fact that, more is expected from them. In other words, amusingly, rice is needed in the Executive council while bran is needed in the SRC.
However, the first lapse of honeymoon of this policy which had denied utopia representation has further entrenched the Elite theory of politics. As a concerned student, here is my opinion on whether the introduction of this requirements for elective positions in the Union’s Council is a tool for quality leadership. More still, whether it is a tool for greater oppression of “higher class” while stripping “lower class” off their rights to be voted for?
ARGUMENT BASIS
Prior to 2918/19 SU’s election form purchase; series of candidates whose interests and political consciousness have matured to the brim, various informal campaign for various posts all vanished into thin air when the Electoral Committee announced the prerequisites for contesting offices; several candidates were withdrawn from the race to the Kunle Adepeju building. Apparent indication of the advocates of this policy was to separate the competent from the incompetent.
ARGUMENTS
The Aristotelian typology of politics, based on who rules and in the interests of who, depicted that democracy is when many rule in the interests of themselves. The Nigeria state itself widely adopts democracy. Various requirements are placed on various offices while the least certifications to hold the office of the president remains the Secondary School Leaving Certificate to rule the population of more than 200million…either ways of experiencing good or bad leadership. The University of Ibadan with an average number of 41,743 students (Wikipedia), in thinking straight as the fount of knowledge, further raised the bar from having at least 3.50/7.00 to 4.50/7.00 or 3.00/7.00. The irony of using SSCE to rule 200million and 3.00 to rule the minute population of 41,473 population is such a great shell game.
I know this is controversial, but the ‘Training ground’ which is one of the manifest latent functions the University Community is meant to serve has already been jeopardized. Reason being that the training ground itself is now reserved for some sort of ‘well equipped’ students in leadership and intellectualism. My mind then wonders: have the so ‘well equipped’ and brainy students lived up to the responsibilities attached to the various offices occupied? Have they truly lived the spirit of activism? Are they true to the struggles of the electorates? When will the glory of the old days be restored? I guess I am not alone in these thoughts and responses are subjective to U & I.
While Political scenery on campus is witnessing increasing apathy and various political offices were yearning for occupants, some were uncontested for with ballot papers like North Korea’s. The instances of the office of the Union’s Sport Secretary, FATSSSA Social Director, etc. Landslide victory is assured if there were candidates; what then to say? The University itself is creating an environment that is apathetic which is a great danger to the mini democracy in our micro-state. With a slow and steady pace which wins the race, the school authority is entrenching a ‘Nigerian local government structure and operation’ and on the path of appointing caretaker president, since sooner or later, no one will be qualified when the bars and standards for contesting offices are further raised.
The need for inclusiveness such as gender parity in holding political offices is one of the issues ought to be addressed rather than implement policies narrowing inclusion. How so? Follow the discourse. Over the years and in present times, the office of the Vice President seems reserved for the female gender as opposed to the remaining six to seven offices being male dominated. Safe to say, prior to the introduction of 2:1 qualification policy, women participation as candidates has been poor.
Though the trait theory of leadership argued that ‘Leadership is rooted in characteristics that certain individuals possess’; to the Electoral Committee, the leadership trait is possessed by individuals either on first class or second class upper degree. The point here is that: eligibility based on academic excellence and leadership excellence differs. The criteria should encapsulate individuals’ cognitive ability, motives, values, skill sets, social skills, expertise, problem solving skills, previous records of leadership, among others.
CONCLUSION
As the first progeny of such qualifications are about to be fossilized and political consciousness seems being resurrected from grave, it is important to consider how well the novel criteria has fared in separating the leaders from the others as well as the further problem of inclusiveness it has created while segregating from the fit and unfit.
It is of relative importance to emphasize academic excellence, but the leadership skill sets and problem-solving skills should not be toyed with. Alas, it is the most feasible and objective means of quantifying student’s intellectualism and cognitive skills. Being at the helm of affairs at the Adepeju building is not a guaranteed lifeline to redeem your CGPA’s lost glory. The Union which needs high sensitivity and must always be handled by the ‘best among the best’. It is thus a clarion call for students to further improve their academic excellence since it is the narrow path in the University to measure how equip a leader is in order to effect change and rebirth the Union’s glory. Everyone must take action and not rely only on ‘Of the greatest gbagba’.
Having explored the various problems and implications associated with the policy, it is important to rescind this policy owing to such. More so, it is detrimental to the latent laboratory function which the University is meant to perform as the training ground for tomorrow’s leaders.
