I laid back yesterday evening after a busy day, as one of our lawyers read aloud what Osita Chidoka wrote about the controversy between JAMB and Miss Mmesoma Ejikeme.
Chidoka’s apparently impressive write-up on the subject clearly shows the fact that there are infinite ways anyone could this matter or try to milk it. Chidoka’s ability to link JAMB and INEC in adverse comparison was such a milking. His ability to use it to strengthen an already existing business relationship between him and JAMB is another instance of milking of an opportunity. That relationship was confirmed by his belief that his pleas to JAMB for mitigation would work.
However, despite the apparent goodwill in Chidoka’s statement, his position suffers some deficits. For example:
(1) It confirms that JAMB acted arbitrarily in its hasty position and imposition of punishment on Mmesoma. Hence, if its ego were massaged with sufficient begging, it will reverse itself. But if JAMB had followed due process, any decision taken would have been fair and solid and not so readily susceptible to arbitrary revisions.
(2) Chidoka admitted that Mmesoma could have been “led down that path”. This confirms the belief that she was probably not the only person involved and that her role, if any, might have been minimal. These uncertainties are the reason for JAMB to have waited and investigated better before final decisions.
(3) Since the 3-year ban imposed on Mmesoma was punitive in nature, the law requires that she be given a fair hearing before any punishment could be imposed. In this situation, a fair hearing would have involved an adequate opportunity for her to know what offences she is accused of and the opportunity for her to present a defense. It is basic law that without a fair hearing, any punishment imposed would violate the constitution. Chidoka did not point this out.
(4) Since Chidoka based much of what he said about JAMB on his personal knowledge and communications with JAMB officials, did he make any effort to speak with Mmesoma and her parents to know her position as well? Would that not have been necessary since Mmesoma is a person from his constituency? How would he want Mmesoma to come clean? How would he get to know what Mmesoma would do if he never gave her the opportunity of any communication or a meeting?
Well, this post is just to register an observation. My organization has already taken the position of waiting for the outcome of Innoson’s investigation. Another purpose of this post is to encourage our members to always think critically in both directions when dealing with any issue.
