UNIABUJA ASUU Division: A Closer Look at Conflicting Views on Strike Action

Introduction:
The Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) at the University of Abuja (UNIABUJA) has found itself at a crossroads with conflicting perspectives emerging within its ranks regarding the recent announcement of an indefinite strike. This development has shed light on internal discord and differing opinions among the members, leading to a significant divide within the union. Let’s delve deeper into the intricacies of this situation and explore the contrasting viewpoints that have surfaced.

The Strike Action

Following the resolution reached at its congress, held at the university’s permanent site on Thursday, May 2, the UNIABUJA  ASUU had declared its intention to go on indefinite strike. The decision could not be unconnected with the disagreement between UniAbuja ASUU members, Prof. Tahir Mamman, the Minister of Education, and Prof. Abdulrasheed Na’allah, the outgoing Vice-Chancellor, regarding the process for appointing a new VC.

The Anti-strike Faction Speaks Out:
In a surprising turn of events, a faction within the ASUU at UNIABUJA has distanced itself from the ongoing strike. Referred to as the “Anti-strike ASUU Members,” this group has vehemently opposed the decision to embark on an indefinite strike. Prominent figures within this faction, including Dr. Abubakar Kari and Prof. M. Y. Gana, have been vocal in expressing their reservations regarding the strike. According to them, the unilateral declaration of the strike by a select group without proper consultation and consensus-building among the broader ASUU membership is not aligned with the democratic principles of the union.

Challenges to the Legitimacy of the Strike:
One of the key contentions raised by the Anti-strike ASUU Members pertains to the legitimacy of the strike action. They argue that the decision to strike was driven by a hidden agenda orchestrated by a select few, rather than being a collective and transparent process involving all ASUU members. This lack of inclusivity and transparency has raised questions about the validity of the strike and its representativeness of the entire ASUU body at UNIABUJA.

Clash over University Governance:
The discord within ASUU at UNIABUJA extends beyond the issue of the strike itself. It is rooted in broader concerns related to university governance and decision-making processes. The accusation of a ‘cabal’ influencing the strike decision highlights underlying power dynamics and tensions within the institution. The failure to conduct elections for key administrative positions and allegations of procedural irregularities in staff promotions further underscore the complex dynamics at play within the university.

A Call for Unity and Dialogue:
As the rift within ASUU at UNIABUJA deepens, it becomes evident that a unified and inclusive approach is essential to address the current impasse. Both pro-strike and anti-strike factions must engage in constructive dialogue to bridge their differences and find common ground. Upholding the core values of ASUU, such as academic freedom and democratic decision-making, is paramount in navigating this challenging situation and charting a path forward that serves the interests of all stakeholders.

Conclusion:
The division within ASUU at UNIABUJA over the ongoing strike reflects broader issues of governance, representation, and decision-making within the university setting. By acknowledging and addressing these internal challenges through open dialogue and collective engagement, ASUU members can work towards fostering unity and solidarity to address common concerns effectively. Ultimately, the resolution of this internal divide will be crucial in upholding the integrity and purpose of ASUU at UNIABUJA and advancing the collective interests of the academic community.