In line with the protest which held in the University of Ilorin yesterday by some candidates who were offered provisional admission into the Institution, the University management has reacted to the development.
The Head corporate affairs of the Institution, Mr. Kunle Akogun said it was wrong to address the students as ‘Unilorin students’ as they are just admission seekers who have not been officially authenticated.
He also noted that the candidates probably didn’t know the larger implication of what they have done, which is plain forgery and examination malpractice.
In his words
“In the first place, it was wrong to address the protesters as “Unilorin students”, as they are just admission seekers whose provisional admissions are yet to be officially authenticated.”
“Out of the 103,000 that made Unilorin their first choice, over 65,000 met the cut-off mark. But our admission quota is just about 10,000.”
“And with the cancellation of post-UTME screening by the Federal Government, the University had to device other means to screen the candidates in order to get the number we want.”
“Ab-initio, we decided against physical screening of the candidates to avoid inviting them to Ilorin.”
“All qualified candidates were then directed to upload their five best subjects, three of which must be directly relevant to their proposed courses of study.”
“It was clearly stated that any misinformation or wrong input of subjects or scores would lead to automatic disqualification’”
“So, on the basis of what the candidates uploaded, they were allocated scores and those that were found worthy were given admission.”
“After that, we asked them to proceed to pay a NON-REFUNDABLE acceptance fee”
“But we still had to carry out further screening of their certificates to confirm the veracity of the scores they uploaded, which gave them the admission.”
“At the University of Ilorin, our tradition is to screen our students both at the entry and exit points. So, if anybody gained admission through false qualification and he/she is not detected at the entry point, he/she would be detected during the screening at the exit point and he would not be allowed to graduate.”
“So, we did the same thing in this circumstance and we discovered that some of those admitted had cheated and this had given them undue advantage over other candidates”
“And this is where the Administration said that anybody that cheated should not be allowed to come in.”
“Please note t
hat these candidates probably didn’t know the larger implication of what they have done, which is plain forgery and examination malpractice. These are criminal offences that are punishable under the laws of the country.”
“If these guys do not soft-pedal in their misguided advocacy, the University authority can be forced to go the extra mile of handing them over to the law enforcement agencies for necessary disciplinary actions. We have resisted the urge to take such action so far because they are infants who still have a long way to go in life!”