AFAS Congress: An Indication of Persisting Divisive Politics

Oluwapelumi King and Francis Ikuerowo

Sequel to Prime’s impeachment, it was indicated that a congress would hold not just to address the issues pertaining to AFAS shirts, and dues but to address any other business relating to the faculty administration. The main issue, many were present to address was the issue of Prime’s impeachment, as Prime had already told AFAS Press through an exclusive interview that he will be appealing the decision in congress as he considered the decision to be unjust and unfair.

After the various issues have been addressed about the shirts and the dues, it was now time to address the main issue. It is important to note for the purpose of the story that before the addressing of the matter, a quorum was already formed and it had observed that quite a number of the people who formed this quorum were from the department of the impeached director of sports, Alawiye Israel. It was also observed amidst some little interviews and interactions with some individuals present that the majority of the people present in the quorum were ready to reinstate Prime had there been a vote. This point is entirely crucial.

Comrade Julius Akani of the Linguistics constituency, a stakeholder of the faculty, pleaded for his reinstatement stating that he was not here to debate the legality and illegality of the impeachment but to plead for mercy, however, he did not move a motion. Comrade Sola, another stakeholder, came also to plead for Prime’s reinstatement but this time, he did move a motion which was not allowed to be seconded as according to the speaker, Akindejoye Olusoji, only the presiding officer (the President, Akinyoola Emmanuel) can give permission to move a motion. This then caused ensuing rage that erupted at the venue of the congress. In summary, no permission was granted by the President for a motion to be moved and the congress was closed without any legal motion for or against Prime’s impeachment, thus ensuring Alawiye Israel remains impeached. The speaker defended the actions of the president stating that “no motion can be moved to overturn an impeachment that is constitutionally right and backed by the constitution.”

Divisive politics ensues when politicians take advantage of their supporters and their groups to get a decision pertaining to them. It is a strategy used by political leaders or parties to gain support by promoting divisive or controversial issues that create polarization within society. The goal of divisive politics is to create a clear “us vs. them” dynamic in order to rally support from a particular group of people. This brand of politics was very prevalent in the last faculty elections that saw the election of the current president, Akinyoola Emmanuel and others. Rhetoric was used by both sides to demonize or scapegoat certain departments and personalities, in order to create a sense of fear or anger to motivate or incite their supporters. The repercussion of this at that time was that it created a visible divide across students of various departments most notably Theatre Arts and Philosophy, the two departments of the presidential candidates.

One would have thought that after a couple of years have passed by, this brand of divisive politics would be eradicated or greatly reduced, instead the divisive politics still remained very clear in the AFAS Congress. Some words were used by both sides- in favour or against to stir up reactions or emotions- to support their motion. This greatly heightened the tension in the venue.

Upon conclusion of the congress, emotions were still very high and people amongst various sides left there more divided than they came in. Again, members of certain departments felt that they were being sidelined because of some of the rhetoric used by some speakers to garner support for their points of view.

Divisive politics destroys and fosters disunity. Afasites, particularly AFAS politicians and stakeholders, should refrain from practising divisive politics. If divisive politics continues to fester, it will further deepen the disunity in the faculty and give rise to more divides among individuals and departments, and we have all witnessed the consequences of disunity, haven’t we?