The reinstatement of Professor Stella Ngozi Lemchi as the substantive Vice-Chancellor of Alvan Ikoku Federal University of Education (AIFUE), Owerri, Imo State, has triggered a wave of outrage and fierce criticism from stakeholders, academics, and legal observers, even as the Federal Ministry of Education insists that due process was followed. The announcement, made following the submission of a report by a five-man Fact-Finding Committee set up by the Ministry, has been described by critics as premature, biased, and a potential threat to the integrity of Nigeria’s tertiary education system.
The Committee, which was inaugurated on 26 June 2025 and chaired by Barrister Olugbenga Kukoyi, Pro-Chancellor of Nnamdi Azikiwe University, was tasked with reviewing the selection process that led to Professor Lemchi’s original appointment, assessing the petitions received, and advising the Ministry on the way forward. The report, according to the Ministry, cleared Professor Lemchi of all allegations, confirmed her professorial status as valid, and stated that the appointment process complied with applicable laws and procedures. The Committee claimed that the petitions filed against her were misleading and without merit and added that her appointment was backed by the four staff unions of the university.
On the strength of this report, the Honourable Minister of Education, Dr Maruf Olatunji Alausa, approved the reinstatement of Professor Lemchi, citing the need to uphold justice and ensure the smooth running of the institution. But what has followed is not a celebration of justice restored, but a deepening controversy over the transparency and credibility of the Ministry’s decision.
Petitioners and academics who were part of the initial selection process have come forward to challenge the Committee’s findings, accusing it of conducting a shallow and one-sided investigation. One of the most serious accusations is that the Committee failed to invite or consult those who submitted petitions against Professor Lemchi. According to documents seen by this reporter, not a single petitioner or professor who raised objections during the selection process was contacted for cross-examination or clarification. Instead, only Professor Lemchi was invited to defend herself, a move that critics argue renders the Committee’s report procedurally defective and substantively hollow.
“The entire process was hijacked,” said a senior academic at the university who spoke on condition of anonymity. “How can a committee make such a conclusive recommendation without hearing from all parties involved? What kind of investigation refuses to listen to both sides?”
The petitioners have also drawn attention to what they describe as glaring irregularities in Professor Lemchi’s academic history, particularly regarding her appointment and promotion as a professor at Imo State University (IMSU). They allege that her promotion lacked required peer review documentation and that her professorship was conferred in violation of laid-down procedures. The authenticity of her academic records and the legitimacy of her qualifications have been a subject of persistent dispute, which the Committee, they argue, chose to ignore.
Also contentious is the Committee’s reliance on the support of the four staff unions within the university. While the Committee presented this support as evidence of confidence in Professor Lemchi, critics say the unions are not statutory members of the university’s selection process or Governing Council and therefore have no legal standing in determining who becomes Vice-Chancellor. “Union support is not part of the selection criteria. It’s a smokescreen. The law is clear about who makes appointments,” said one of the university’s legal consultants.
The Ministry’s move has also drawn fire from lawmakers, with several members of the House of Representatives Committee on University Education expressing dismay at the timing of the decision. The House Committee had opened a formal investigation into the circumstances surrounding Professor Lemchi’s appointment and was yet to conclude its hearings when the Ministry reinstated her. Sources within the National Assembly told this reporter that the Committee had scheduled further sessions to hear from stakeholders but was effectively blindsided by the Ministry’s announcement. Critics see this as a deliberate move to undermine parliamentary oversight.
To further complicate matters, the office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF), through which presidential approval for sensitive appointments is traditionally processed, has reportedly not issued any communication endorsing the reinstatement of Professor Lemchi. The Ministry had sent a letter to the President via the SGF seeking a position on the matter. According to internal Ministry correspondence, no response has yet been received. The absence of presidential clearance raises legal questions about the authority under which the Minister acted.
Meanwhile, the Ministry’s earlier decision to install Professor Onyeka Aloysius Chijioke as Acting Vice-Chancellor is also under scrutiny. Appointed amid the controversy surrounding Professor Lemchi’s initial appointment, Professor Chijioke’s term was scheduled to run until 8 August 2025. However, his appointment was abruptly terminated on 22 July 2025, just days before the Committee’s recommendation was made public. No official explanation has been provided for the sudden dismissal, but insiders say it was aimed at clearing the path for Professor Lemchi’s reinstatement regardless of the ongoing investigations.
Legal experts warn that the reinstatement may have violated provisions of Step 6 and 7 of the pre-qualification status for the appointment of a substantive Vice-Chancellor as enshrined in the University (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1993 as amended in 2003 and 2012; including the roles of the University Council, Senate, and selection board. There is concern that Professor Lemchi’s appointment bypassed or ignored several of these procedural steps, particularly during the pre-qualification phase, where questions about her eligibility and academic record were raised but allegedly overlooked by the previous Governing Council led by Mrs Joy Emordi.
The reinstatement also appears to contradict the Minister’s own policy statement of 7 April 2025, in which he introduced new guidelines to enhance transparency and uphold integrity in the appointment of Vice-Chancellors, Rectors, and Provosts. That statement, widely praised at the time, warned against the influence of politics, lobbying, and administrative shortcuts in academic leadership selections. Critics now say the Ministry has violated its own principles by reinstating a candidate whose appointment is tainted by unresolved controversies.
Adding to the confusion is the content of Professor Lemchi’s appointment and promotion letters. Contrary to her claim that her professorship was on a pro-bono basis, official documents reviewed by this newspaper show that her letters bear salary grade levels, indicating that she received remuneration. The discrepancy has fueled allegations that Professor Lemchi misrepresented her academic and financial status, both during the selection process and in her defence before the Committee.
Moreover, since her appointment and promotion at IMSU, Professor Lemchi has reportedly made no notable academic contributions or administrative impact within the university system, a fact that petitioners say disqualifies her from occupying such a high-level leadership role. “She has not supervised any postgraduate students, has no new publications, and has had no departmental or faculty administrative role in recent years,” said one of the professors who filed a petition against her.
Supporters of Professor Lemchi, however, maintain that she is the victim of a coordinated smear campaign orchestrated by those with vested interests. They argue that she emerged as the most qualified candidate during the selection process, and that the attacks on her character and credentials are politically motivated. Union leaders have called on the university community to respect the Ministry’s decision and allow the reinstated Vice-Chancellor to focus on stabilizing and developing the institution.
Despite these assurances, the controversy continues to deepen, with legal action now reportedly being considered by some petitioners. They are exploring the option of seeking judicial review of both the appointment process and the Committee’s report. If such action materializes, it could further delay the resolution of the matter and plunge AIFUE into another cycle of uncertainty and instability.
The Ministry, for its part, has remained defiant, maintaining that it acted within its powers and based on the best available information. In the words of the Minister, the decision to reinstate Professor Lemchi was made “in the interest of fairness, justice, and the university community.” But the mounting backlash suggests that many stakeholders disagree.
For now, Professor Lemchi’s reinstatement stands. But her tenure is off to a rocky start, overshadowed by unanswered questions, disputed facts, and growing dissatisfaction among members of the academic community. Whether this decision will hold in the face of legal, legislative, and institutional challenges remains to be seen.
Discussion about this post