Social Director’s Manifesto/Accountability Check: Another case of promise and fail?

By Aduwo Ayodele

It is popularly said that to whom much is given, much is expected. And for every commitment sworn to be upheld, there must be corresponding accountability. This reminds one of that famous, particular biblical reference. That ‘some were given ten talents, some five, but to each according to his ability’. It was in that same regard that Richard Elijah, a 300L student of the Music Department, took upon his shoulder in 2021. Richard’s aim included the decisive plan to serve the Association of Faculty of Art students devoting himself to the service and well-being of the faculty and all members of the Association.

It becomes necessary to recall that back in 2021, on the verge of seeking student votes for his candidacy, Richard Elijah made a considerable number of promises bordering on the social welfare of students. Doing justice to the term ‘social welfare’, the coinage itself refers to every measure of help which can be provided to persons in need and can rightly refer to well an advert to Section H, numeral (i-vi) of AFAS constitution which explains statutorily among other duties that the Director of Social and Welfare services is eminently responsible for matters relating to the general welfare of members of the Association. Matters which thereupon and thoughtfully must cut through all slant, bend and twist of every Afasite.

In contrast to the set of public statements representing his once vehemently projected intentions, the serving Director of Social and Welfare Service, Richard Elijah has performed both infamously and less to his blueprint and handwriting. While Richard’s manifesto would seem to a first-timer as a tub of momentous plans, sparsely have these high-sounding ideas competently fly without trademarks of drawbacks. His plans, according to that manuscript were compartmentalized into five invoices of promise. With barely some weeks for the current administration to slide into the archive of history, these five invoices of his campaign stand on the touchstone of an accountability check. How dubious or successful have they fared?

BUSINESS AND CREATIVE SOCIALISATION

After his aforementioned allegiance to his constitutional duties, Richard’s manifesto revealed first, his promising intention to commence a weekly display of ‘Entrepreneur of the Week’, which was aimed at bringing students’ entrepreneurs within the faculty to the common knowledge of all Afasites. This plan, good as it may sound, would amplify the business of such students, by bringing the business to the awareness of persons in need of such service. If actualized to the letters, about twenty-six student-entrepreneurs in a faculty of thousands would have their business conception connected to the minds of the AFAS audience. This idea however has only been flown once and has never seized out.

With this plan untapped, the publicly declared promise of Richard Elijah has remained uncatered for. His statement of defence had been that “after test running, we encountered some difficulties and we are still working on the best route to go about it”. The failure of this unimplemented plan was hinged on the “issue of this is what I ordered, versus this is what I got” which may ensue in the long run.

Still on the first invoice of his manifesto, Richard’s candidature made a bold voice to say he would “create an online periodic AFAS magazine which will bring creativity among Afasites into the spotlight”. This online-specific magazine plan has neither been periodic nor has been socialized into any known reality. The plan for an ‘AFAS Magazine’ has only continued to exist as fictitious as possible. The botched outcome of this promise has been silence upon silence until time will assassinate the current Akoem-led tenure. Richard must have been anxious to impress the general audience during the last electoral cycle with his less costly and much more efficient e-magazine. That this idea has arrived un-experimented, with no known regard to living up to it, explains how accidental leadership can be, especially when zeal and intention and the self-seeking urge to be called a student’s leader cannot cohesively fit into the other.

Trade Fair
The second invoice of his promise to the generality of students was a trade fair, independent of AFAS Week’, which was aimed at promoting Afasites, AFAS and the University community. This trade fair would mean opening a market model, usually physical like the mainstream commodity market, where the caustic act of merchandising would be done. This plan, like an imaginary AFAS magazine under the headship of Richard Elijah, the Director of Social and Welfare Services has only remained prompted, contemptuous and impulsive. There has never been a trade fair, independent of AFAS week as promised. The only hope for a ‘trade fair’ is now dependent on AFAS week.

HUBS
Book clubs are knowledge groups that up-skill members in their abilities at reading books. This hub, initiated under the auspices of the current social and welfare director, has publicly fared once. Held in the first semester, AFAS Book Hub organized a book reading event with Purple Bloom Publishers. For the hub, one may not be assured of its sustainability. While the club and its members may argue that it has done one or two things within its closed platform, the hub’s public book reading session has not organized any known gathering this second semester. The idea to organize another edition of the event has been excused for the paucity of funds to push and pull an open event through. The hub could have stood beyond its stout height if the idea was much more prioritized than it is currently rated. With little funding to empower the event and persistent effort at securing partnerships, the book hub would have resonated with its existence and viability.

It is worth mentioning that on the creation of an academic committee for tutorials which was promised after the trial of a book club on the page of Richard’s manifesto, he claimed that he became aware that creating an academic committee was not under his jurisdiction during the Press night at the last electoral cycle.

SANITATION

Sharing concern about the level of cleanliness at the faculty and how to ameliorate untidiness. Richard Elijah would part singly at the sanitation activity held on April 15th, late into the whole session, to dramatize the practice. Easily, the idea of sanitation brings to mind the discussion about the state of AFAS toilets, and how the conditions of these facilities have remained worthy of concern. The toilets smell and the faculty knows that these facilities spread their odious smell and pose a challenge to the response of sanitation. As the issue of welfare is concerned, this strand of concern is no little to arrest and prevail upon. Could it then be said that the geared effort to sanitize the faculty has sailed and ultimately addressed this concern? Perhaps the impact of sanitation would have reached more depth if the commitment to prioritize this invoice of the plan had objectively been planned.

To conclude, it is apparent that Richard Elijah, the Director of Social and Welfare Services for the Association of Faculty of Art students, has not fulfilled most of the promises he made during his election campaign. Many of the initiatives outlined in his manifesto, such as the “Entrepreneur of the Week” and an online magazine, have not been implemented or have been implemented only once. Additionally, the book club has not sustained its momentum due to a lack of funds and sponsorship. Overall, Richard Elijah’s journey of social welfare in AFAS has not lived up to expectations, and it highlights the importance of accountability and fulfilling promises made during an election campaign.