By The9jaTREND
Ambrose Alli University (AAU), Ekpoma, is in crisis — and there is little ambiguity about who bears responsibility. This is not a systemic failure. It is not an abstract governance issue. It is the direct consequence of the leadership style and actions of the Vice-Chancellor, Prof. Mrs. Eunice Omonzejie.
From the very beginning, her appointment was flawed and contentious. She was not the first choice of the Governing Council. She did not emerge on merit from the primary selection process. Her eventual emergence from a second round — widely believed to have been influenced by external pressure — undermined confidence in her leadership before she even assumed office.
Rather than rise above that controversy and build trust, the Vice-Chancellor chose a different path. By all indications, she entered office with a grievance — and she has governed with it. Instead of working with the Governing Council, she has openly and consistently worked against it.
This is not speculation; it is evident in her actions. Since assuming office, she has engaged in a sustained confrontation with the Council, particularly with the Pro-Chancellor, Chief Dan Osi Orbih.
Administrative energy that should have been directed toward stabilizing the university has been diverted into a personal and institutional power struggle.
Her decisions have reinforced this pattern. The appointment of Prof. Andrew Eromonsele as Deputy Vice-Chancellor—reportedly in violation of established procedures and widely viewed as a politically influenced choice — set the tone for a leadership that prioritizes loyalty over due process.
The conflict soon escalated. The Vice-Chancellor did not merely disagree with the Council; she moved to undermine it. Through a series of actions and communications, she attempted to discredit its members and weaken its authority. When those efforts failed, she escalated further—authoring a petition against Honourable Lukman Mohammed and pushing for his removal.
This was not routine administration. It was a calculated political move. And in targeting a council member linked to Comrade Adams Oshiomhole, the Vice-Chancellor effectively dragged the university into a broader political confrontation it had no business being part of.
While this battle raged at the top, the university itself began to deteriorate. And here lies the most damning indictment of all: governance has suffered because the Vice-Chancellor abandoned her core responsibilities.
Staff welfare has been neglected. Salaries are no longer paid regularly. As of now, March salaries remain unpaid, while February salaries were only released in the first week of March. This is not a minor delay — it is a pattern of failure.
Workers are left in financial uncertainty, struggling to meet basic obligations. This situation did not arise in a vacuum. It is the direct result of misplaced priorities. While the Vice-Chancellor is preoccupied with fighting the Governing Council, the administration of the university has been allowed to drift.
Staff are no longer silent about this maladministration of the Vice-Chancellor. Across AAU, there is growing anger and frustration. Many workers now openly question her leadership and vehemently reject her appointment. The sentiment is widespread and unmistakable: “We have never had it this bad.”
The breakdown extends into the university’s union structure. Industrial harmony has deteriorated sharply under her watch. The Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) which was her base is reportedly grappling with unexplained deductions from salaries, with no satisfactory explanations provided. Questions about tax deductions and remittances remain unanswered—raising serious concerns about transparency and accountability.
At the same time, the Joint Action Committee (JAC) which has become a ready tool in her hands has now been weakened, with its leadership accused by members of aligning with the Vice-Chancellor in her unnecessary war with the Governing Council, rather than defending workers. The result is a fractured union system and a workforce that feels abandoned.
And then there is the unresolved issue of the reported ₦1 billion financial intervention meant to address salary arrears. Workers have demanded answers. None have been given. Silence, in this context, only deepens suspicion.
All of these points to one conclusion: this crisis is not accidental—it is man-made. And it is being driven by leadership that has chosen conflict over competence, confrontation over coordination, and personal battles over institutional stability.
The Vice-Chancellor had a choice—to unify or to divide, to govern or to fight, to lead or to dominate. She has made that choice clear. And AAU Ekpoma is paying the price. Unless there is an urgent and decisive correction, the situation will only worsen. What is at stake is no longer just reputational damage—it is the functional survival of the university.
At this point, the question is no longer whether there is a crisis. The question is how much longer AAU can endure leadership that continues to deepen it.