The Federal Ministry of Education, Abuja has clarified the position of the recently amended Federal Colleges of Education Act, 2023, as related to the tenure of appointment of Provosts into the Federal Colleges of Education across the country.
In a letter by the Minister of Education through the legal department of the Ministry signed by Mrs. E. B. Azorbo, Director, Legal Services for the ministry clarified and stated that subsequent to the passage of the Federal Colleges of Education (amended) Act, 2023, Provosts appointed into the colleges are entitled to one single term of 5 years as tenure of office.
The letter is titled: Re: Federal Colleges of Education Act 2023: Request For Proper and Wholesome Implementation of the Federal College of Education Act, 2023 To Avoid Crisis In The Colleges of Education Sector.”
Apparently in the ministry letter dated 23rd, May, 2024 addressed to the Joint Action Committee (JAC) of Staff Unions, Federal College of Education (T), Akoka, Lagos Chapter in response to their letter dated April 8th, 2024, it emphasized and explained the position of the law, more particularly regarding Section 13 (6); of the Act as affected the appointments of those Provosts who have been appointed prior to the assent of the amended Act.
It explained that “Section 13(7)(a)(b) provides: ‘If on the commencement of this section, a Provost appointed before the commencement of this Act has held office for: a. Less than five (5) years, the Provost shall be deemed to be serving the five-year single term and shall not have the right for the renewal of his appointment for a further term of four (4) years; and:
(b.) “More than five (5) years and serving the second term of office, be deemed to be serving the last term of office without any further extension.”
To clear any ambiguity, the Minister further explained that the above section 13 (7)(b) of the FCE (Amendment) Act, 2023, “provided two scenarios, the first being a situation where the Provost was appointed in the first instance and has not completed the tenure of office of four years before the commencement of the amendment Act, then he shall serve for the period of five years without enjoying renewal of appointment.
“In this case, one more year shall be added to the earlier 4 years as stated on the appointment letter based on the repealed Act.
“The second scenario which is the case at hand is where a Provost has completed the first tenure of four years and has been re-appointed for another tenure of four years when the amendment Act commences, he shall be deemed to be serving his last term of office of four years without further extension.
“The non-further extension in this case is that he cannot enjoy five years under the second tenure as enjoyed by the Provost in the first Scenario. He will therefore complete the four year term of the second tenure.”
The Minister argued that the, “essence of this is to allow the tenure of appointment on the appointment letter of the Provost to run out and not to be cut short. This is justice and equity which is intended by the draftsmen and not otherwise.”
He added that, “Since the Provost has been appointed for the second term of four years when the amendment Act came into force, he is therefore deemed by the Act to be serving his last term of office. If the drafters of the law had intended otherwise, then the phrase “the last term of office” wouldn’t have been used, rather, “last year of office” would have been employed.”
He submitted further that the wordings of the Section is clear and unambiguous which does not require any other interpretation than the literal meaning.
He argued that, “the word in a status should be given their plain, ordinary and literal meaning. It is believed that ordinary meaning words contain the true intention of the Legislature.”
While admonishing that further grievances on the issue be forwarded to the Governing Council of the Institution for their consideration, the Minister commended the efforts of the JACt owards maintaining peaceful industrial atmosphere in the Institution.
