In a small village, the village elder, tasked with guarding the sacred spring, refused to speak with the village chroniclers. Instead, he offered them a single, biased scribe tied to his own household. The chroniclers sought the truth, but the elder’s actions muddied the waters. The spring, once a symbol of life and transparency, began to stagnate. The spring was contaminated, leaving the villagers with rumbling of the stomach. The villagers whispered of the elder’s motives, and trust began to erode. The gatekeeper controlled the bridge to truth, allowing only selective travelers to pass. He refused passage to the village elders and the village at large, yet welcomed those who sang his praises. As the waters beneath began to churn, the villagers wondered: who’s next to cross?
Free, Fair and Transparent? Not Anymore
NUESA press published the first interview with the ESEC chairman on October 14th 2025 where he stated clearly that the Faculty of Education election will be “a free fair and transparent election and the protection of all electorate’s data”, it should be stated clearly that the recent actions of the ESEC chairman negates his assurance on the Faculty of Education election.
The mock election for the Faculty of Education was conducted on November 10th, 2025, all attempts to reach out to the ESEC chairman was responded with excuses upon excuses, there wasn’t any communication as regards the mock election from the electoral committee. This silence prompted NUESA press to reach out to the ESEC chairman to schedule an interview for clarification on the concluded mock election. It should be noted that the ESEC Chairman, Adetunji Samson, ignored our request, refused to pick calls at the mention of an interview. The same ESEC Chairman that stated that “There has been effective communication since this commission was inaugurated and we will keep up that pace” ignored to grant interview on matters that concern all educators, addressing matters at his own freewill. On November 11th, a member of the press approached the ESEC chairman at the faculty quadrangle about his attitude towards not granting interviews, his response was that “the interviews are too much untop the faculty election, i no get time”, this is the attitude of a commissioner saddled with the responsibility of overseeing the process of electing credible candidates that’ll propel the progress of the Faculty forward. Later that night, he agreed to grant the interview but NUESA press observation is that the ESEC Chairman, Adetunji Samson evades the question being asked, he masterfully dodged the questions leaving more questions than answers rather than addressing the concerns, he opted for vague statement and scripted response. His expectations that we’d publish the interview without clarity raises concerns about transparency.
His response was more of defining concepts that are generally known instead of answering the questions based on the context it was being asked. For instance, while still asking questions based on the mock election he clearly stated “ I was expecting you to ask a question on why the election has not been held”, this is an indication that, he expected the member of the press to speculate the questions on an aspect Sidelining other important aspect that matters to educators.
The Sidelining of Faculty Press; A blow to Transparency
The ESEC Chairman, Adetunji Samson reached out to the Voice of councilors press organization and ADE press organization for an interview while sidelining the faculty press. On Friday, November 21st, 2021, the ESEC Chairman sent a fifty-one second voice note to ADE press, stating that he wants the departmental press to interview him on the election process, disqualification of Presidential Aspirant, mock election. In his text messages to ADE press, he stated “ Madam E-in-C, i think i told you what i would be expecting from your interview, mock election,the disqualified candidate, manifesto night and election” He also stated that NUESA press refused to publish his interviews. Mr ESEC Chairman, every interview is to shed light and not caress anyone’s ego or try to showcase your public speaking abilities.
A Chat of the ESEC chairman with ADE press
To set the record straight, NUESA press only interviewed the ESEC Chairman thrice and two interviews were published. The events that circumscribed the interview with the ESEC Chairman wasn’t an easy task, his abandonment, attitudes before granting the interviews raises several questions. It’s also pertinent to note that most of what he chose to inform educators on has been discussed earlier, they’re not new information of which educators are not aware of. The actions of the Electoral chairman raise concerns about accountability and fairness. By selectively choosing his platform, he appears to control the narrative, rather than serving the people. As leaders, shouldn’t they be open to scrutiny, embracing diverse voices and perspectives? The chairman’s shenanigans only fuel speculation. His elusive stance undermines trust and credibility. We won’t be swayed by unclear messages or selective disclosure. Our duty is to shed light, not to amplify obfuscation. The ESEC chairman owes clarity, not just statements. It’s time for straight answers, not carefully crafted soundbites.” Is transparency not a cornerstone of fair leadership? We seek clarity, not selective storytelling.
The same ESEC Chairman who acted that the “interviews are too much untop election” is parading himself in the inbox of departmental press for interviews. Mr ESEC Chairman, How can we trust the bridge to truth when access is selectively granted? We demand openness, not a one-way mirror. Mr ESEC Chairman, Did you want to inform or to influence? The faculty press remains committed to shedding light, not to amplifying selective narratives? How do you respond to allegations that you’re prioritizing personal or departmental interests over the welfare of the faculty and students? Why did you choose to grant an interview to the departmental press, sidelining the faculty press, which has been covering your activities?
Mr ESEC Chairman, the response to your interview in ADE press was devoid of logical connections. It doesn’t in any way reflect what’ll contribute to the progress of the Faculty. This critically showcases the character of a man who has a special ambition or in any way just wants to appear in publications without passing the right information. The press organization is not your PR, they are meant to pass credible information that might in any way be useful to all educators.
Secrecy or Confidentiality: Names of accredited voters lurking in the shadows
On Thursday, November 24th, 2025, a member of the NUESA press approached the ESEC Chairman, Adetunji Samson regarding the publishing of the names of accredited voters, he clearly responded that he won’t be publishing the names of accredited voters to “protect voter’s data.” Mr ESEC Chairman, Faculty of Education is not the only faculty that’ll be conducting elections in a digitalized way. How will you prove transparency when the names of accredited voters are in shadows? You’re negating your statement “There has been effective communication since this commission was inaugurated and we will keep up that pace”, there hasn’t been any effective communication from the ESEC, there’s no report about the mock election.
From the few online elections across other faculties – Arts, The Social Sciences, Law, and even the department of Political Science, the processes were accompanied by a physical monitoring space within the faculty. There was a showroom where the voting activity could be observed in real time. That transparency alone built the voters confidence. That visibility alone acted as the first layer of accountability..
Mr ESEC Chairman, with your recent actions and your attitudes towards this election. Educators cannot rely on your assurances. The electoral committee constitutes students like us. Each individual in the committee represents different departments. The recent happenings raise suspicion. This election needs neutral people, transparency, an election devoid of controversies, not an election fueled with chaos, personal opinion, power drunken individuals. Where is the political vote that should guide individuals?
A Call For Congress
The fire is burning the roof, and the key holders in the faculty chose silence in the midst of chaos. Instead of offering water to douse the raging fire, they chose to walk away. The power of the congress is stated in the NUESA constitution (Article IX, Section III). History, they said, will never forget those who are gatekeepers of the truth. The President, the Speaker of the Council, the FLC, why have you not taken any steps regarding the election process? Does being independent simply mean educators can be deprived of transparency and accountability as regard the state of the electioneering process? Does that mean the ESEC power is above the collective voice of the educator? Or watch until the fire burning roof destroys the entire properties in the house? Every Educator is entitled to contribute their own quota to the ongoing event that circumscribed the faculty election. This is not the time for educators to choose silence but rather talk to power that resists any form of transparency and accountability
The Power of the congress in NUESA constitution. Article IX, Section III
Educators deserve honesty. They deserve clarity. They deserve a process that can stand on its own strength without secrecy or sudden decisions. If this election will be remembered for anything, let it be remembered for fairness, openness and educators standing even against all odds.
This article was first published on Nuesa Press on November 11, 2025
