OF THE HALLOWED CHAMBER AND A CLOSE REALM OF OBSOLETENESS

A wise man once said, “the secret of joy in work is contained in one word— excellence, which means to know how to do something well. This cannot be used to describe the low attendance of the honourables in the last sitting where important issues like the presentation of the audit and investigative committee reports were brought to the house. It is known that some members resigned but that still does not amount to the little representation of constituencies in the house sittings. About time to also ask if some of these honourables are living up to their responsibilities.
On the presentation of the audit and investigative report, eyebrows were raised concerning the findings of the audit committee. For instance, the sports director was put on a spot wherein his transparency and accountability were being questioned. The audit committee found out that the sports director withdrew the sum of N149, 170 and not the supposedly sum of N147, 320. When asked, he gave an unclear explanation. The audit committee also reported that the General Secretary collected some funds without approval. It was also reported that the N200 collected by the Gen. Sec for the freshers’ oath form was insinuated by the Financial Secretary to be the General Secretary’s property. A case that sounded quite hilarious. The General Secretary, Alawode Peter, on the other hand refuted these claims and explained how the N200 was meant for the oath forms and none of the money went into the association’s account.
Final findings on the vice president expenses revealed that she had taken the sum of N35, 100 from her pocket to cover the expenses she made at the orientation week as there was no debit of N35, 100 reflecting in the association’s account. But nevertheless, the audit and investigative committee while presenting their reports were not comfortable with the way the vice president handled the memorandum of agreement as there were sheer instances of forged signatures and unexplained expenses.
The speaker of the house, Hon. Olumide Osinuga, after everything, adopted the reports of the audit and investigative committee and forwarded all the issues raised to the faculty management. Of course, issues brought to the tables of the house are now swayed to the desks of the faculty management for final rulings. The toothless of the legislative council has only been elongated further by this act by the speaker.
Further mortifying I the house last sitting was how the audit and investigative shuffled the rest of their report to the tables of the management, most likely authenticating the claims that their reports were not meant for public ears and that the management will take due actions from there. Typically exemplified was how copies of their reports were passed on to the few members present in the house, the press exclusive. But whatever be the case, we need to know at this stage if the house has any iota of relevance left and if the audit and investigative committee can be trusted to do their work without in a partially opened confinement. From prior engagement with the Sub-dean of the faculty, Dr. Barrister Oke, he clarified that the involvement of the faculty was not in any way to belittle the constitutional powers of the legislative council but they were only there to intervene in instances when decisions made in the house proved to be heated and controversial. Their involvement would only be meant to stir the course of sanity in the faculty and validate claims of the guilty and innocent party. However, what played out in the last sitting has only reinforced that decisions may continuously pass through the offices of the management—a a typical case of a bill being passed on in the national chambers and being sent to the office of the president for assent before it can be made into law.
On the executives’ choice of a coopted member in the house
It was a mini cinema in the house as an honourable questioned the character of the coopted member chosen by the executives. Hon. Muhammed Salahudeen raised his misgivings to the house concerning Mr. Jesufemi Oyekanmi, the proposed coopted member. The Honourable took the house on a memory lane to the time when the house suspended the president and drama ensued with Mr. Oyekanmi in the midst of the crises. Hon. Muhammed supported his claims with video evidence that was played for the house where it was vividly portrayed that Mr. Oyekanmi in his agitated state took the mace of the house. The deeds of a man can never be forgotten either good or bad and the questionable act made by Mr. Oyekanmi resulted to the refusal of the house adopting him as a coopted member. Did the executives forget about Mr. Oyekanmi’s past deed? Most likely they did not as the ferocious display of the coopted member in question was, after all, to their own interest. The executives should, however, remember that any coopted member that is to represent them in the house must be worthy in character because his actions and in-actions would reflect who they are within and outside the legislative house.