Special to USAfrica magazine (Houston) and USAfricaonline.com, the first Africa-owned, US-based newspaper published on the Internet.
*Agbedo, Professor of Linguistics, Fellow Netherlands Institute for Advanced Study Amsterdam, is a Contributing Analyst to USAfrica
Reuben Abati’’s October 7, 2025, commentary titled “UNN, Nnaji’s Certificate and a Troubled Nation” was, as always, elegantly written and intellectually stylish. But beneath its rhetorical brilliance lurked a troubling lapse in professional balance, fairness, and ethical restraint. In discussing the controversy surrounding the now-resigned Minister of Innovation, Science, and Technology, Chief Geoffrey Uche Nnaji, Abati’s piece strayed from objective commentary into territory of premature judgment and institutional denigration. His sweeping claim that the University of Nigeria, Nsukka (UNN) “has raised questions about its own integrity” was not only injudicious but unfair to a university that, for over six decades, has stood as a bastion of academic excellence and integrity in Nigeria. Rather than scrutinize the veracity of the allegations, Abati chose to lampoon UNN and its Vice-Chancellor, Prof. Simon Uchenna Ortuanya, as if the university were an accomplice in wrongdoing. That leap from journalism to judgment betrayed both impatience and a lack of contextual awareness.
In what appeared to be a doubling down on his earlier castigation of the UNN, Dr. Abati, during the Morning Show of today, Wednesday, 8 October 2025 – a live programme of Arise News – once again trained his rhetorical guns on the institution, reiterating and amplifying his Tuesday comments. He accused UNN of “flip-flopping” and “speaking from both sides of its mouth” over its records, phrases that have now become his signature refrain in this developing controversy. Going further, Abati went overboard to assert that such “flip-flopping” questions the integrity of the university and constitutes a monumental embarrassment to its alumni, who, according to him, go about bragging as ‘Lions and Lionesses’.
His remarks, couched in tones of moral indignation, portrayed the institution as having compromised its credibility by allegedly shifting positions on the authenticity of the disputed documents. This renewed verbal onslaught, rather than reflecting analytical depth or circumspection, seemed designed to rehash and reinforce a narrative of institutional failure – one that discounts the procedural and administrative complexities that attend internal verification of records, especially in a case already before the courts. In effect, Abati’s doubling down transformed what could have been a moment for sober reflection into a sustained reign of invective, lending the impression of prejudice and media sensationalism rather than balanced public commentary.
UNN, like all reputable institutions of higher learning, operates by procedures that safeguard both the integrity of its records and the rights of individuals. When discrepancies arise – particularly those involving decades-old student data – the university is duty-bound to verify and re-verify before making definitive public pronouncements. To condemn this institutional caution as “speaking from both sides of the mouth,” or ‘flip-flopping’ as Abati did, is to misunderstand how due process works in academia. The university’s first correspondence merely acknowledged that available records reflected that Mr. Nnaji was once a student in the Department of Biochemistry/Microbiology. A subsequent clarification, based on more exhaustive verification, stated that he did not complete his studies and therefore could not have graduated. These are not contradictions; they are stages in fact-finding. In academic parlance, attendance is not graduation. Universities issue degrees only when all requirements – coursework, examinations, and clearances – are completed. The distinction may seem minor to the uninitiated, but to any credible institution.
In the weeks since Abati’s piece was published, events have taken a decisive turn. Chief Geoffrey Nnaji has resigned his position as Minister of Innovation, Science, and Technology.
According to a statement by the Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Mr. Bayo Onanuga, President Bola Tinubu “accepted the resignation of Geoffrey Uche Nnaji following allegations against him.” The President thanked him for his service and wished him well in his future endeavours. In his own resignation letter, the former Minister maintained that his decision was not an admission of guilt but a “principled choice to respect the sanctity of due process and preserve the integrity of ongoing judicial proceedings.” His words were unambiguous: “My decision to step aside is therefore a personal choice — not an admission of guilt, but rather a principled decision to respect the sanctity of due process and to preserve the integrity of the judicial proceedings currently before the court.” That statement underscores two critical points Abati overlooked: first, that the matter remains sub judice; and second, that UNN’s careful handling of inquiries was fully justified.
*A Case Before the Court*
The principle of sub judice – that one should refrain from commenting publicly on matters pending before a court – is not a mere technicality. It exists to protect the integrity of judicial processes and prevent trial by media. Herein lies Abati’s gravest misstep. As both a journalist and a legal practitioner, he should know that commenting in a way that prejudges a case before the court is ethically reckless. His essay, though couched in sophisticated prose, essentially attempted to convict both Mr. Nnaji and UNN in the court of public opinion. Meanwhile, the Enugu State Government has categorically distanced itself from the controversy. In a statement issued by the Director of Information, Mr. Chukwuemeka Nebo, the government urged the former Minister to “carry his own cross and clear his name before Nigerians,” stating explicitly that it had no hand in the allegations. That official position invalidates the narrative that the controversy was politically motivated, a point that Abati, in his eagerness to dramatize, never paused to verify.
*When Irony Turns to Self-Indictment*
Even more troubling in Abati’s essay was his descent into ridicule. His claim that Nnaji could “rent a crowd,” “play the ethnic card,” or “hire spiritualists” was unworthy of the high intellectual pedestal from which he has often lectured Nigeria’s moral conscience. Ironically, the same Abati who derided Nigerians for their “obsession with titles” – sneering that “even mechanics refer to themselves as Doctor this, Doctor that” – is on record publicly chastising an Arise News reporter for failing to prefix his own name with “Dr.” during a live broadcast. Such contradictions expose a selective morality. They suggest that while Abati is quick to prescribe ethical purity for others, he exempts himself from the same standard. The philosopher’s robe, it seems, sits loosely when the wearer refuses to practise what he preaches.
*UNN’s Integrity Is Intact*
UNN remains one of Nigeria’s most reputable academic institutions – a fact no controversy can erase. Established in 1960 as the nation’s first indigenous and autonomous university, UNN has consistently upheld its motto: “To Restore the Dignity of Man.” Its alumni occupy distinguished positions across disciplines – from medicine and law to engineering, diplomacy, and academia. To impugn the integrity of such an institution on the basis of one contested case is both illogical and unjust. Indeed, the university’s conduct throughout the Nnaji saga demonstrates institutional maturity. It resisted the temptation of sensationalism and relied instead on documentation and due process. If every Nigerian public institution acted with such discipline, our democracy would be on firmer moral ground.
*The Media’s Burden of Responsibility*
Abati’s essay inadvertently highlights a deeper problem – the tendency of Nigerian media elite to conflate commentary with condemnation. The media’s role is not to replace the courts but to inform the citizenry responsibly. When journalists become prosecutors, credibility suffers. Public intellectuals, more than anyone, must recognize the power of words to shape perception. In volatile situations, restraint is not weakness; it is wisdom. What Nigeria needs is not more outrage, but more discernment – the ability to separate facts from assumptions and substance from spectacle.
Now that Chief Nnaji has stepped aside, the storm should be allowed to settle where it belongs – in the courts, not the commentariat. Let the facts be weighed by law, not by loudness.
As things stand, the University of Nigeria has shown fidelity to procedure and respect for the rule of law. Its Vice-Chancellor and Senate have acted within their statutory powers, guided by institutional integrity. That alone should command public respect.
Meanwhile, “meddlesome interlopers” should guard against making interventions that could be considered sub judice, since the case remains before the judiciary. Abati, being a lawyer and a commentator, should know better!
The University of Nigeria, Nsukka, does not need to defend its name before a mob tribunal. Its legacy speaks for itself, a legacy built on diligence, truth, and resilience.
The certificate controversy involving Chief Geoffrey Nnaji and his consequential resignation, though unfortunate, offers a lesson in accountability and humility. It affirms that in a democracy, public office is not an entitlement but a trust. And it reminds every commentator that words, once spoken, can either build institutions or break them. As an Igbo proverb teaches, “The sun may hide behind the clouds, but it never disappears.” In time, the light of truth will pierce through – and Nigerians will see clearly who stood for justice, and who merely sought attention.
