Editorial

As CONUA, NAMDA come on stream

THE onboarding of two academic unions, namely the Congress of Nigerian University Academics (CONUA) and the Nigerian Association of Medical and Dental Academics (NAMDA), adds an interesting dimension to the protracted conflict between the Academic Staff Union of Nigerian Universities (ASUU) and the Federal Government. While the government’s role in the establishment of these associations remains unclear, the speed with which it has moved to issue them certificates of registration is proof that it is relieved to see them birthed and will be eager to work with them as a way of undermining ASUU’s hold on the Nigerian university system.

Not unexpectedly, ASUU has not welcomed both newly registered associations with open arms. The union’s lawyer, Mr. Femi Falana (SAN), has been positively hostile, describing them as illegal and claiming that “under the current labour law regime in Nigeria, you cannot have two unions or three unions in the same sector. In other words, within the academia in Nigeria, there can only be one registered trade union, and that is ASUU pursuant to the Trade Union Act as amended.” Falana continued: “We are going to have a mushrooming of trade unions, which threatens industrial peace in the country. We cannot have two unions in the university, nor can we have two unions in other unions (sic) in the country. Politically, it won’t work.”

While we are agnostic towards CONUA and NAMDA, as we are indeed towards ASUU, we are alarmed by Mr. Falana’s submission. First, the claim that the establishment of a plurality of unions will “threaten industrial peace in the country” overlooks the fact that there has been little industrial peace in the country’s universities even though ASUU has more or less operated without challenge for the past three decades. Second, the insistence that “you cannot have two unions in the university” is a recipe for fascism and a violation of the fundamental right of individual academics to freedom of association. If ASUU cannot tolerate the existence of other unions in the system, then it is not as democratic as it likes to posture. Mr. Falana, an assiduous advocate for pluralism and civil rights, ought to know better. Third, when Mr. Falana says that a plurality of unions won’t work “politically,” he arrogates unto himself prophetic powers beyond his ken as a legal advocate. The submission seems motivated by pure partisanship rather than a sincere effort to see the current crisis resolved. It is neither justifiable in law nor defensible in logic.

In saying this, we do not automatically pitch our tent with the two new unions. Our agnosticism is genuine. What we are defending instead is the principle behind their founding, a principle that, until now, the senior advocate had always stood behind. Nor are we giving the Federal Government a pass. To say that its well-documented chicanery is largely responsible for the ongoing impasse is an understatement. Nevertheless, the government is well within its rights to work with other groups within the university system.

The current strike in public universities has gone on for too long. All the parties involved, including CONUA and NAMDA, should collaborate with the aim of finding a lasting solution.

ALSO READ FROM NIGERIAN TRIBUNE