Visitorial Powers: Can courts interfere with varsities' decision not to award a certificates, degree or diploma?

 Visitorial Powers: Can courts interfere with varsities' decision not to award a certificates, degree or diploma?

Joshua Ufedo Baba

University Of Jos

Introduction.

Recently, I read the post of a final-year medical student who was rusticated from a Nigerian university for theft. Years of hard work, time, and toil all faltered in the end. Behind the sad news of such expulsion was a prompting to know what measures universities use in awarding degrees, certificates, and diplomas and whether courts can interfere with the conferment.

 The administrative body of any institution is clothed most often with judicial or, more aptly, quasi-judicial powers to hear and determine matters of civil nature as they relate to the smooth running of such institutions. This power and responsibility are backed by Section 36 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), and such decisions, although not final, as they are appealable before a court independent of such administrative bodies, are within the ambit of their functionality. Universities, which are also part of the said institutions, are also made up of bodies that regulate and administer the laws that guide such institutions. 

Accordingly, a university student is a ward of the institution, and once a provisional admission is given, the student has to abide by the rules that guide the conduct of the said institution; otherwise, the admission is revoked. There have been arguments concerning such relations as to whether the relationship between institutions and students is contractual. The courts settling such questions have held in a plethora of cases that the relationship that exists between a university and a student is one that is statutorily provided for and not contractual.  The court reiterated this point in Ani v. University of Ibadan [1992] 5 NWLR (pt. 220) where it held while describing such nature:

"Contracts of employment relating to University staff differ from the simple admission exercise governing the enrolment of students into the undergraduate and graduate programmes."

While a contractual obligation exists for the former, a statutory provision exists for the latter.

In Garba v. University of Maiduguri[1986] 1 NWLR (pt 18) Per COKER J.S.C:

"It has been argued by Chief Williams that the right of the students vis-a-vis the University is of a contractual nature and therefore an internal matter for the Visitor. With respect, I beg to differ I find myself unable to accept this submission. The relationship is statutory - and not contractual."

Thus, the university has no obligation to award degrees to a person solely because he has been admitted to the institution. As an institution, a university has its own requirements for the award of certificates, degrees, and diplomas; these requirements are indispensable.  ONNOGHEN, J.C.A. (as he then was) speaking in University of Ilorin v. Akinrogunde [2002] 3 NWLR (pt. 632):

"We must not lose sight of the fact that the Universities exist to train future responsible leaders of our great nation and that one of the conditions which they must fulfill before being presented as graduates is that they must be found worthy in learning and character."

Both have to be fulfilled before the award of degrees, certificates, and diplomas can be conferred. In order to learn, such students must have passed the requisite courses and examinations. In character, such a student must possess a character deemed fit and proper as an ambassador of the institution. 

WHETHER A COURT WILL INTERFERE WITH A UNIVERSITY'S REFUSAL TO AWARD A CERTIFICATE, DEGREE, OR DIPLOMA.

As established earlier, the relationship that exists between a university and a student is one that is statutorily provided for and not contractual. As such, a university is governed by the Act establishing it, and its conduct is regulated, at first instance, by the said Act. Decisions like the conferment or award of certificates, diplomas, and degrees are provided for by the Act and are to be done by the established body after fulfilment of the requirement. The Supreme Court, in highlighting the attitude it takes when faced with such decisions held in University of Ilorin v. Akinola [2014] 12 NWLR (pt.1422)

"The courts will not readily, and cannot in any disguise, usurp what is appropriately the functions and powers of the Senate, the Council and the Visitor of the University in the selection of their proper candidates for awards of Degrees, Diplomasand Certificates. This is so because, generally, the consideration for an award of such accolades are considered the domestic domain of Universities."

Thus, the courts are wary of interfering with the decisions of universities when it has to do with their choice of candidates befitting of representing the institution. In Magit v. University of Agriculture Markudi [2005] 19 NWLR (pt. 959) PATS ACHOLONU JSC bearing a foreboding for the time the Court would begin to interfere with the university's decision to award or withhold degrees had said:

"A University is a degree awarding body and... can neither delegate its degree awarding powers nor be stampeded to make award where it does not see it fit to do so. For the court to use its awesome magisterial powers to compel a University to award a degree would in effect mean that the court has invested itself with the necessary powers to fully appreciate the nuances taken into consideration to award University degree... A University is a place of great learning and research. I would view with consternation and trepidation the day the court would immerse itself into the cauldron of academic issue which is an area it is not equipped to handle. It will indeed be alarming for any court worth its salt to enter into the arena of questioning why a University has refused to award a degree to any student. The danger posed by such venture is better imagined than expressed."

Conclusion

This view has certain, albeit restricted, exceptions. In circumstances where the student was not given a fair hearing and no cause was offered for withholding the result or certificate, the court will take appropriate action. The explanation for courts' approach is that they accept the conclusions of institutions that follow all of the established principles of fair hearing and make their final decision without sentimentality or prejudice. 

.