MOUAU SAYS VICE-CHANCELLOR NOT INVOLVED IN RECRUITMENT EXERCISE. (PHOTO).

 

MOUAU Says Vice-Chancellor Not Involved in Recruitment Exercise

The management of the Michael Okpara University of Agriculture, Umudike (MOUAU), has stated that its Vice-Chancellor, Prof. Ursula Akanwa, played no role in the university's last recruitment exercise.

Addressing journalists on Tuesday, the Head of Public Relations and Protocol, Mr. Anyaso Anyaso, said the recruitment process, including the placement of successful applicants on the government payroll, had been completed before Prof. Akanwa assumed office on March 1, 2026.

According to him, the Federal Government granted a waiver for the recruitment of 426 staff members, a figure that was approved by the university's Governing Council, which directed the then Vice-Chancellor and management to strictly comply with the approved number.

Anyaso, however, disclosed that appointment letters were issued to 618 persons, while 553 applicants were captured on the Government Integrated Financial Management Information System (GIFMIS). He explained that the system eventually uploaded only the 426 positions approved by both the Federal Government and the Governing Council.

He stressed that the Vice-Chancellor has no access to the GIFMIS platform and therefore could not alter or remove any names uploaded to the system.

The university spokesman urged the public and stakeholders to disregard what he described as misleading claims by "mischief-makers," advising them to rely only on official university communication channels for accurate information and avoid spreading unverified reports.

Responding to questions from journalists, Anyaso also denied allegations that force was used to recover identity cards from the disengaged workers.

He maintained that the university did not issue dismissal letters to the affected workers and did not compel them to surrender their identity cards.

The clarification follows allegations made on Monday by representatives of the 127 disengaged staff members, who claimed they were not only removed from their positions but were also humiliated during the retrieval of their identity cards and replaced by other employees.