“They have no knowledge of such a thing, nor their fathers. Grievous is the word that comes forth from their mouth. What they say is nothing but falsehood.” (Q.18:5)

If I were a Professor of English, I would have begun by repudiating the authors of the verbiage that generated this rebuttal, circulated on Wednesday and Thursday (December 28 and 29, 2016) with sadistic frenzy in traditional and new media, as deranged, reckless, mischievous and psychopathic nincompoops. But as I am not, I would only take recourse to the Prophet’s statement when he was unjustly persecuted on the day of Taif: God forgive them perhaps something good will come from their future generations.

In spite of the allusion to Prophet Muhammad’s approach, I would not have condescended to dignifying the defamatory statements issued against my person with a response on three counts. The first count is that one would not bite a dog simply because a dog has bitten one. The second is that the issue was claimed to have been reported to the EFCC, which has the means to take the right course of action after establishing the prima facie of the case brought before it. The third is the need to thwart the Satanic objective of distracting me from the national assignment which they protested against but failed.

Nevertheless, given the avalanche of text messages, mail and phone calls I have received from all over the world, I realize that if I do not set the records straight, at least for those who believe in me and what I represent, like Dr Mahfouz Adedimeji of the University of Ilorin, whose appreciated intervention was on point, I might not be fair to them. Secondly, the assassins did widely circulate and celebrate the “destruction” of the “victims” beyond the EFCC and across nations. I therefore deserve to be heard through the same routes.

In a period when common sense is no longer common, it would not be surprising that some people would not take effusions that are bereft of an iota of sense with a pinch of salt.  So, the vituperations that “the 49 liars” and their mentors directed at me more than four years after I left office as Vice-Chancellor of the University of Ilorin are explained thus:

The Pension Act of 2004 provided that 7.5 per cent of emoluments should be deducted from staff salaries and remitted into their pension accounts with Pension Funds Administrators (PFAs). Most universities, including the University of Ilorin, based the calculation of 7.5 per cent on basic salary and transport allowance. This was the case between July 2004 and December 2006 before I became Vice-Chancellor. I know no PFA and if salaries were deducted and saved in employees’ accounts, I would not be the beneficiary.

Then, from January 2007, the Government that is matching the employees’ contribution with another 7.5 per cent directed that the deduction should be based on Consolidated Pay. Some universities were compelled by the fake and fraudulent campus hyenas not to comply with the directive of 2007. About two years into my tenure, my attention was drawn to the new decision which was of course advantageous to workers whose higher sum was being equally matched by the Government. I convened a meeting of stakeholders including the Unions on the Government directive and all parties agreed not only to commence the higher savings (which Government doubles rather than double lower contributions) but also to double the difference for a certain number of months to ensure full compliance with effect from the stipulated January 2007.

I summoned the Ilorin representatives of all the PFAs to reiterate the date of compliance from when higher matching additions from Government should also be credited to each contributor’s account. Any averagely educated person would understand who the beneficiaries of the compliance are, who for their tomorrow sacrifice a part of today’s comfort rather than the unreasonable agitators who insist on consuming tomorrow. Some universities under the spell of some club crawlers do not comply to the eventual disadvantage of their unfortunate retirees and perhaps to the advantage of clever PFAs. If those who parade doctoral degrees cannot understand this simple logic, may God save Nigeria from the anarchists. I as Vice-Chancellor complied and I believe few other universities did. How that would benefit me personally baffles me.

The subsequent introduction of IPSS made deductions by the university unnecessary. Government was making the deductions from the source and crediting the PFAs and these ignorant characters believe that my successor should also be nailed on behalf of the Federal of Ministry of Finance. If what was being deducted at the University of Ilorin had been abnormal, IPSS would have corrected the abnormality, common sense dictates. When grey areas arose, clarifications were made with the PFAs. For my own pension deductions, I also had to approach my PFA to be on the same page with them regarding my contributory pension.

Those who compare the contributions of two Professors based on different interpretations of deduction suffer from selective amnesia more so when Professors are of different levels. Some Senior Lecturers even earn higher Basic Pay than some Professors based on the number of years they have spent on their ranks. Why did they hide this fact as a possible factor for disparity in intra-university or inter-university disparity?  Why would supposed academics who teach research methods not start from PENCOM for authentic information before unilaterally declaring UNILORIN guilty and celebrating insubordination?

I am extremely selective in accepting gifts from even personal friends. My needs are limited and my legitimate income is sufficient to spend on my volunteer work. I have never in my life collected bribe, inflated contracts, extorted anyone nor accepted gifts beyond “Thank You greeting cards” from any contractor, dead or alive.

As Vice-Chancellor, I started the practice of publishing the financial transactions of the University every Monday in a publication circulated far and wide by hand and online. This has happily been sustained by my successor to-date. Those who have skeletons in their cupboards don’t choose to publish their financial details. I am aware many universities don’t do so till today and the charlatans who make frivolous allegations against me should mention their mentors who do so.

Information Technology is good to determine the quality of the hirelings assembled to assassinate my character. The only one I faintly know among them led his pastor and his father-in-law, a former Vice-Chancellor of the University of Ibadan, to me in order to mount pressure on me to offer his wife, the Vice-Chancellor’s daughter, a temporary appointment as an Assistant Lecturer. I bulged to pressure out of deference to the father-in-law (because the Department could do without an additional lecturer) and the man of God. But soon thereafter, this character became a strong advocate of withdrawal of the power of temporary appointment of the Vice-Chancellor!

I do not claim perfection as it is the exclusive preserve of the Almighty Allah but I dare say I stand on a higher moral pedestal than “the 49 liars” and their masters. God will continue to keep them busy and they shall continue to lament their failure at the University of Ilorin and in life precipitated by their own inner insolvency. The barking of dogs does not affect the flight of a plane.

This statement is just to re-assure my admirers that the allegations against me are like pure wind with no solidity. I remain who I have ever been by the special grace of Allah, the Almighty.

Lastly, my explanation does not foreclose the possibility of legal action against the authors of the campaign of calumny against me and their willing collaborators. For the latter, I hope they will have the shame of publishing my rebuttal and if they don’t, I still believe it will reach all the right audience, anyway.

I rest my case for now and season’s greetings to you all.



Prof. Is-haq O. Oloyede, OFR, FNAL