As the court prepares to rule on the Vice-Chancellorship, an ICPC investigation and a series of complaints over contracts, research funds and university administration have widened the questions facing COOU
The dispute over the appointment of Prof. Kate Azuka Omenugha as Vice-Chancellor of Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu University has grown into a wider controversy over the way the institution is being governed, with a pending court case, disciplinary actions against senior academics and investigations into alleged financial and procurement irregularities adding new layers to the dispute.
Omenugha, a former Commissioner for Education in Anambra State and professor of Mass Communication at Nnamdi Azikiwe University, was appointed acting Vice-Chancellor of COOU in November 2023 after the expiration of Prof. Greg Nwakoby’s tenure. She was subsequently confirmed substantive Vice-Chancellor by Governor Chukwuma Soludo, the university’s Visitor, on August 6, 2025.
The appointment followed an assessment of candidates by a seven-member joint committee of the university’s Governing Council and Senate. The committee interviewed nine candidates and ranked them according to agreed criteria covering academic qualifications, leadership experience, integrity, grantsmanship, fundraising and performance at interview.
The scoresheet seen by Law & Society Magazine placed Prof. Patrick Osegbue first with 83.14 per cent, followed by Prof. Leonard Onuba with 81.28 per cent and Prof. Chukwudi Okani with 78.14 per cent. Omenugha scored 74 per cent and was placed fifth.
In a letter dated August 1, 2025, the committee, chaired by then Pro-Chancellor Prof. Chidi Odinkalu, forwarded its recommendations to Governor Soludo in accordance with the university’s governing law.
Five days later, the Governor confirmed Omenugha as Vice-Chancellor.
Soludo’s administration has maintained that the Visitor was entitled to choose from the candidates who met the required standard. In a response signed by Secretary to the State Government Prof. Solo Chukwulobelu, the government said six of the candidates had scored above 70 per cent and therefore met the university’s “A” grade threshold.
The government also relied on the provision of the university’s law stating that the Vice-Chancellor is appointed by the Visitor “after considering” the recommendation of the joint committee.
Odinkalu and Osegbue have challenged that interpretation. Their position is that the university’s Ordinance II(4)(d) required the Governing Council to arrange the candidates in order of merit and recommend the first-placed candidate to the Visitor, while also forwarding the second and third candidates.
The disagreement is now before the National Industrial Court.
The court battle
Osegbue filed his case in August 2025, asking the court to nullify Omenugha’s appointment and recognise him as the candidate entitled to the position on the basis of the selection process.
The dispute took another turn after the Anambra State High Court in Otuocha, in a separate case brought by a university lecturer, affirmed Omenugha’s appointment and restrained university staff and organs from obstructing her duties.
Odinkalu questioned the jurisdiction of the High Court to determine issues he said were already before the National Industrial Court.
At the National Industrial Court hearing on July 21, 2026, Osegbue’s counsel, J.S. Okutepa, SAN, urged the court to uphold the challenge and declare the appointment unlawful. Counsel to Omenugha and Governor Soludo, Patrick Ikwueto, SAN, argued that the Visitor acted within his powers.
Justice John Tergama has fixed October 15, 2026, for judgment.
Until then, the central legal question remains whether the Visitor could lawfully bypass the order of merit produced by the university’s selection committee.
Then came the dismissals
The controversy surrounding the Vice-Chancellorship has been accompanied by a series of disciplinary actions.
On June 11, 2026, Soludo inaugurated the university’s eighth Governing Council, headed by Prof. Peter Onwualu, after dissolving the previous council.
The following day, the new council announced the dismissal of five members of staff, including Osegbue and Prof. C.C. Nwabachili, the immediate past Dean of the Faculty of Law.
The university said the dismissals followed disciplinary proceedings over alleged misconduct. Osegbue has disputed the explanation, maintaining that his problems began after he challenged Omenugha’s appointment.
One of the issues for which he was disciplined involved a postgraduate course he was accused of failing to teach. Osegbue argued that the students concerned had not met the university’s minimum attendance requirement and that he could not properly examine students who had not fulfilled the requirements.
The university has rejected the suggestion that his dismissal was connected to the VC dispute. Omenugha has also pointed out that other candidates who contested the Vice-Chancellorship remain in senior positions at the university.
The contracts and conflict-of-interest questions
While the appointment dispute was unfolding, allegations concerning procurement and possible conflicts of interest were also being raised.
One petition to the EFCC questioned the university’s dealings with Koncioo Enterprises Ltd, a company in which corporate records identify Omenugha and members of her family as persons with significant control.
The university entered into an arrangement with the company for the supply of sachet water at the Igbariam campus. The arrangement later broke down following a disagreement over transportation costs and was terminated.
Staff subsequently complained about restrictions on the sale of other brands of table water on campus. A separate petition asked the EFCC to investigate the matter.
The university denied knowledge of any petition against the Vice-Chancellor at the time and rejected allegations of wrongdoing.
The question raised by the documents, however, is a straightforward one: where a senior university official or members of the official’s family have an interest in a company dealing with the institution, what disclosures were made and who supervised the transaction?
The same issue arises from allegations concerning contracts for infrastructure, printing and supplies.
The N4bn TETFund intervention
COOU received about N4 billion under TETFund’s 2024 Special High Impact Projects intervention for projects including a 2,000-seat auditorium, a library and landscaping and furnishing works.
Documents reviewed by Law & Society Magazine show that the auditorium and library contracts were awarded in September 2024. Companies linked in corporate records to businessman Paul Chukwuma were named as contractors for the two projects.
The projects subsequently attracted complaints over the procurement process and their progress.
When the projects were inspected, work on the auditorium and library had not been completed. The university has maintained that the projects were not abandoned and that construction depended on funds released by TETFund.
There were also allegations that the contracts were awarded without adequate competitive bidding or the required approvals. The university has disputed the allegations.
These are matters that can be settled by examining the tender documents, approval records, payment schedules and certificates of work done.
Research grants under scrutiny
Perhaps the most consequential allegations concern TETFund research grants.
In 2024, 75 COOU researchers received Institutional-Based Research grants. Complaints later emerged that beneficiaries were asked to remit portions of the money after it was released.
Some beneficiaries told The ICIR that they paid money into accounts provided to them, while others declined to do so. Those who refused said they subsequently experienced difficulties accessing later tranches.
The allegations eventually reached the ICPC.
On July 2, 2026, the commission invited 92 COOU staff members to appear before its investigators in Awka over allegations relating to procurement breaches and the handling of public funds.
The invitation does not amount to a finding of guilt against those involved. It does, however, mean that allegations that had previously circulated through petitions and internal complaints are now being examined by an anti-corruption agency.
Students caught in the middle
Beyond the dispute among university officials, there are concerns about how the continuing problems affect students.
Students interviewed for the investigation complained about multiple charges, delays in examination results, late postgraduate admissions and the cost of the university’s digital Student Life Cycle Portal.
COOU has defended the portal as part of its digital transformation programme and described the N15,000 annual charge as an investment in the university’s information and communications technology infrastructure.
Students have also questioned payments made for General Studies courses and other departmental requirements, including payments into accounts outside the university’s conventional fee-collection channels.
Some of the individuals and businesses named in connection with these allegations did not respond to requests for clarification before publication.
The university, for its part, has consistently maintained that its administration is focused on reforms and has pointed to developments in digital services, infrastructure, student affairs and academic administration.
A university waiting for answers
The immediate legal question at COOU will be answered when the National Industrial Court delivers its judgment in October.
The wider questions will take longer.
Who should appoint a Vice-Chancellor when a university law establishes a particular selection procedure? How much discretion does a Visitor possess? What safeguards should apply when members of senior officials’ families have commercial interests that intersect with university business? How are research grants monitored after they reach beneficiaries? And who independently checks procurement decisions involving billions of naira in public and intervention funds?
These are not questions that can be settled by competing press statements.
The records should settle them.
COOU has the opportunity to demonstrate that its governing laws, procurement procedures and financial controls are strong enough to withstand scrutiny, regardless of who occupies the Vice-Chancellorship. The authorities investigating the allegations have an equally important responsibility to establish what happened, separate evidence from accusation and ensure that anyone who breached the law is held accountable.
For now, the university remains caught between a court battle over its leadership and a growing list of questions about its administration.
The October judgment may decide who has the legal right to occupy the Vice-Chancellor’s office.
It will not, on its own, resolve the governance questions that have brought COOU to this point.
