Dr. Emmanuel Sebastian Akpan V. University of Calabar, Calabar (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

ONYEKACHI AJA OTISI, J.C.A. 

The Appellant lodged this appeal against the judgment of the National Industrial Court, sitting at Calabar Division, Coram Hon Justice O. A. Obaseki-Osaghae, J. delivered on June 13, 2014 in Suit No. NICN/CA/76/2013, wherein the reliefs sought by the Appellant, as claimant were dismissed with costs of N20,000.00.

The facts leading to this appeal, as discernible from the Record of Appeal are as follows: The Appellant was a Lecturer and an employee of the Respondent. Before his demotion by the Respondent on March 1, 2013, he was a Senior Lecturer who had applied for promotion to the position of Reader. His application was in response to a Memo was sent by the Registrar of the Respondent to all Deans of Faculties, Provosts, Directors of Institutes and Heads of Departments calling for Academic Staff who were due for promotion to submit their works and articles through their respective Heads of Departments for the purpose of the 2012 Assessment and Promotion. The Appellant submitted the required items through his Head of Department.

?On receiving the applications

1

from academic staff who applied for promotion, the Respondent, through its Vice Chancellor, consulted a body called “Confidential Academic Verification Associations” (CAVA) to investigate fake journals submitted to the Appointments and Promotions Committee by the Respondent’s academic staff; including the Appellant. The said CAVA concluded its investigation and submitted its Report to the Respondent’s Vice Chancellor. The Appellant was not invited to appear before CAVA.

The Respondent’s Appointments and Promotions Committee forwarded the CAVA report to the Respondent’s Governing Council, which approved same and referred the matter to the Management of the Respondent for disciplinary actions. At this point, and as recommended by the Respondent’s Governing council, the Respondent’s Vice Chancellor constituted a five-man Investigatory Committee headed by Professor Akanimo Essiet to investigate all the cases of suspected fake journals submitted by some academic staff for the 2012 promotion exercise, and to recommend punishment. The Investigatory Committee concluded its investigation and submitted its report to the Vice Chancellor who in turn submitted the

2

said Committee’s Report to the Respondent’s Governing Council. The Appellant was not invited to appear before the said Investigatory Committee.

The Respondent’s Governing Council wrote to the Appellant a letter, inviting him to appear before its Disciplinary Committee, erroneously stating that he had already appeared and testified before the Investigatory Committee. Another letter was thereafter written to the Appellant inviting him to appear before the Respondent’s Council Disciplinary Committee to clarify issues related to some of his journal submissions for promotion.

The Appellant appeared before the Respondent’s Council Disciplinary Committee. At the conclusion of proceedings, the Appellant was found culpable of publishing in fake journals. On recommendation of the Committee, he was removed from his office as a Senior Lecturer and demoted to the rank of Lecturer 1, which demotion was made public by publications in various media. The Appellant was also directed to “refund all monies earned from” his “unmerited promotion to the rank of Senior Lecturer from 1st October, 2009 to the date of the letter.” Aggrieved by this decision, the

3

Appellant instituted action in the lower Court for redress, seeking the following reliefs:
1. A DECLARATION that the Claimant’s employment with the Defendant is an employment with statutory flavour.
2. A DECLARATION that the demotion of the Claimant from the rank of Senior Lecturer one (1) on the grounds that he chose to publish his articles in “fake journals”, and without complying with the laid down procedure as contained in the terms and conditions of his employment is malicious, unlawful and misconceived.
3. A DECLARATION that, having regards to the conditions and requirements laid down for the promotion of academic staff of the Defendant, the Claimant is eligible and qualified for appointment and promotion to the rank of a Reader in the 2012 promotion exercise conducted by the Defendant and should be so promoted.
4. AN ORDER cancelling and/or nullifying the recommendations of the 2012 Appointments and promotions Committee in so far as it affects the Claimant.
5. AN ORDER of perpetual injunction restraining the Defendant, its officers, servants, agents, assigns and privies whatsoever and in whatsoever manner from acting on the

4