The controversy surrounding the expulsion of the former Nnamdi Azikiwe University (Unizik) student after her altercation with a lecturer has sparked heated debates, dividing public opinion into two opposing camps. However, with the emergence of new video evidence, it is time to reassess the situation and acknowledge where the real injustice lies.
Initially, the dominant narrative painted the student as aggressive and unruly, especially after footage surfaced showing her tearing the lecturer’s shirt. This depiction fuelled widespread condemnation, with many arguing in defense of the lecturer. However, a more revealing video has now surfaced, showing the lecturer grabbing and dragging the student’s dress by her chest, confirming her claims that her breasts were at risk of being exposed. This physical overreach was not only unprofessional but also ethically unacceptable.
Those who defended the student from the beginning have now been vindicated. They argued that the lecturer’s actions crossed the line of professional conduct, while others, including myself, focused on her reaction rather than the provocation that led to it. The lecturer had no right to touch the student in such an inappropriate manner, and it is deeply troubling that this aspect of the altercation was overlooked in the rush to punish her.
Unizik’s decision to expel the student now appears excessively harsh, especially in light of the full context. While disciplinary action may be warranted, outright expulsion seems disproportionate given the circumstances.
The university should re-evaluate the evidence, reconsider its judgment, and commute the punishment from expulsion to suspension.
This case is a stark reminder that rushed conclusions can lead to miscarriages of justice.
The conversation should now shift from defending entrenched positions to demanding a fair and balanced resolution—one that ensures accountability for all parties involved.
Response to “OPINION: Unizik Expulsion: Time to Reconsider the Punishment and Acknowledge the Truth”
How would anyone prove that the new video is authentic? Why was it not presented before the panel that investigated the case right from the beginning. Let nobody take us for a ride. In these days of technology, anyone can edit any videos to suit his purpose. I take this as a late damage control.