Crusaderhotnews
Fresh controversy has erupted at Ambrose Alli University over the implementation of a digital services agreement involving SchoolTry Limited, with a group of concerned stakeholders calling on the University's Governing Council to immediately intervene in what they describe as a test of institutional governance, accountability and adherence to due process.
The stakeholders, in a statement made available to journalists on Friday, argued that public debate surrounding the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the university and SchoolTry has shifted attention away from what they consider the central issue—whether the agreement received the statutory approval of the University's Governing Council.
According to the statement, the controversy should not be viewed as opposition to digital transformation or technological innovation. Rather, the stakeholders maintained that while universities must embrace digital solutions to improve efficiency, such reforms must be implemented within the framework of established laws and institutional procedures.
They noted that the matter assumed a new dimension following an earlier public position reportedly taken by the Governing Council that it neither approved nor authorised the SchoolTry agreement. In their view, the subsequent implementation of services under the disputed arrangement raises questions about institutional authority and compliance with the University's governance structure.
The stakeholders also referenced a university press release dated July 3, 2026, announcing the resumption of online transcript and certificate applications through the new digital platform. They argued that the announcement suggests continued implementation of the project despite the reported position of the Governing Council.
According to them, the issue has now moved beyond the signing of an MoU to one involving the limits of executive authority within a public university. They contended that while the Vice-Chancellor exercises broad administrative powers as the University's Chief Executive and Academic Officer, such powers remain subject to the University's enabling laws and the oversight responsibilities of the Governing Council.
The statement further expressed concern that allowing a transaction allegedly disowned by the University's highest governing body to continue without clarification could set what they described as a dangerous precedent for institutional governance. The stakeholders warned that such a development could weaken established checks and balances and erode confidence in the University's decision-making processes.
While acknowledging that supporters of the initiative have argued that the digital platform could improve service delivery, increase internally generated revenue and modernise university operations, the stakeholders insisted that the perceived benefits of any project cannot replace statutory approval or due process.
They therefore called on the Governing Council to activate the University's internal accountability mechanisms by instituting what they described as an independent and impartial inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the SchoolTry agreement.
According to the stakeholders, such an investigation should not be interpreted as punitive but as an essential component of due process, capable of establishing the facts, providing fair hearing to all parties and strengthening institutional integrity.
They added that if the Vice-Chancellor acted within the limits of her lawful authority, a transparent investigation would vindicate her. Conversely, they argued, if procedural or statutory breaches are established, appropriate corrective measures should be taken in accordance with the University's regulations.
The group concluded that the controversy extends beyond the SchoolTry platform or the personalities involved, describing it as a defining moment for governance at Ambrose Alli University. They maintained that the long-term credibility of the institution depends on the consistent application of the rule of law, collective responsibility and institutional accountability.
0 Comments