- By: Professor X
Many students do not know that they can be prosecuted to face Student Disciplinary Committee or disqualified from participating in one activity or the other if they show negligence to the school rules and regulations, or feign indifference to the regulations of the process of a particular activity of the institution such as competition, registration, election, etc.
AThe Students’ Union election that is fast approaching has transformed the environment of the institution to one filled with political manifesto and the good ethical conduct demonstrated by the aspirants or prospective candidates for the election. But will it not be quite absurd if these prospective candidates who turned good overnight are the first in violating the rules of the election? Or what reason can be associated to the violation of the rules of election process by a prospective candidate – negligence or indifference?
But it should be understandable that any violation out of negligence may still be pardoned with the Students’ Union Electoral Committee’s discretion, while violation made out of indifference signifies the willfulness of the candidate or aspirant to make such violation on the basis of being unconcerned about it, and thus, such candidate or aspirant is to be sanctioned or prosecuted for that. How then does the school community distinguish between a violation made out of negligence or indifference?
On the 22nd of August, 2019, PRESS COUNCIL released a publication that detailed the outcome of the meeting held by the 2019/2020 Students’ Union Electoral Committee. In the publication, to avoid the candidates’ cry of negligence when sanctions are placed on them for violation of the rules of the election process, emphasis was made on some violations – inscription on roads and walls and pasting of posters on unauthorised walls – which are believed to be the commonest among student aspirants.
While some student aspirants adhered keenly to these rules of electioneering, and those who already violated made necessary corrections to avoid facing sanctions and being disqualified, it is quite a show of irresponsible leadership, a display of unethical human behaviour and a demonstration of staunch indifference as some students choose to violate the rules instead – an example of such student aspirants is Oyediran Taiwo Hassan, who made the entrance gate of the PRESS COUNCIL hall the board to paste posters of his political aspiration.
As contained in the earlier publication, some of the evidences of violation as shown to the students’ populace; the inscription on the road at Music, and that of the road along SUG building, were that of the same Oyediran Taiwo. While it becomes difficult for PRESS COUNCIL to make a correlation between the violator and the PRESS COUNCIL, is it then not just to conclude that the posters on the PRESS COUNCIL gate are clear indication of getting back at PRESS COUNCIL because of the publication that earlier contained his name?
This impetuous act of violation by this aspirant should not only be seen as a dare of indifference to the electoral committee and that of uncouth retaliation to the PRESS COUNCIL, it should also be considered from the perspective that if student aspirants cannot show conformity to the rules and regulations of election, how then do they preach to and implore the common students whom they want to govern to adhere strictly to the election rules and regulations, and that of the Institution at large.
It can then be clearly understood that this student aspirant who made this violation hasn’t done it out of negligence, but rather out of indifference or stark retaliation, and thus be brought to book.