Damilola Adesheyou v. Speaker, Faculty of Arts Students’ Representative Council (SRC) & Ors.

Case Overview

This matter was brought before the Students’ Judicial Council of Adekunle Ajasin University, Akungba Akoko, in 2007. The plaintiff, Damilola Adesheyou, the democratically elected President of the Faculty of Arts Students’ Association (FASA), challenged his impeachment and subsequent mandate to refund public funds, claiming that the process was fundamentally flawed, irregular, and violated the FASA Constitution. The plaintiff’s challenge focused on the lack of due process and fair hearing afforded by the Defendants—the Students’ Representative Council (SRC) and its Pro-Panel Committee. The Legal Temple served as the Plaintiff’s Solicitor in this landmark intra-faculty governance dispute.

Background

The plaintiff, in his capacity as the President of FASA, was subjected to a disciplinary process that culminated in his impeachment. This process was initiated by a letter of allegation presented to the Students’ Representative Council (SRC) by the General Secretary of FASA. The SRC subsequently set up a Pro-Panel Committee to investigate the matter. Following the committee’s report, the SRC passed a resolution that impeached the President and mandated him to refund Three Hundred and Sixty-Four Thousand Naira (₦364,000.00) to the Faculty’s coffers within two weeks. The plaintiff contended that this entire procedure, from the initial allegation to the final resolution, was carried out without proper adherence to the FASA Constitution and constituted a denial of his right to a fair hearing.

Plaintiff’s Claims

The plaintiff sought a declaration that the actions taken against him were invalid on the following specific legal and procedural grounds:

That the letter of allegation presented by the General Secretary was in violation of Article V, Section 1(a)&(b) and Section 2(i)-(vi) of the FASA Constitution, making the entire process void ab initio.
That the investigation conducted by the Pro-Panel Committee was improperly carried out, marred with irregularity, insincerity, and a failure to convict the plaintiff on all costs.
That the report of the Pro-Panel Committee was unacceptable, worthless, and of no legal significance due to the flawed investigation.
That the participation of the Budget and Finance Committee members in the Pro-Panel Committee constituted a breach of the plaintiff’s right to a fair hearing.
That the subsequent resolution of the SRC based on the irregular Pro-Panel Committee report was inappropriate and of no legal effect.
That all actions, omissions, and orders by the FASA Students Representative Council were null and void as they lacked proper constitutional foundation.

Reliefs Sought

The plaintiff prayed the Students’ Judicial Council for the following orders and reliefs:

A declaration that the letter of allegation by the General Secretary against the Plaintiff is invalid, null, and void.
An order that the report of the Pro-Panel Committee be quashed for irregularity and insincerity.
A declaration that the involvement of the Budget and Finance Committee members in the Pro-Panel Committee and their subsequent involvement in the ratification of the report constitutes a breach of the Plaintiff’s fair hearing.
A declaration that the resolution of the SRC on the report of the Pro-Panel Committee is inappropriate and of no legal effect.
A declaration that all actions, omissions, and orders of the FASA Students Representative Council are null and void and of no legal effect.
An order of Perpetual Injunction restraining the Defendants (their agents, privies, and servants) from enforcing the report, which mandated the Plaintiff to refund ₦364,000.00, pending the determination of the substantive case.
Any further order or orders the court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case.

Significance

This case established a critical precedent regarding the supremacy of constitutional provisions and the inviolability of fair hearing principles within student governance structures. It reinforced that disciplinary actions, especially impeachment, cannot be carried out based on defective procedures or reports. By seeking and obtaining an injunction against the financial mandate, the case demonstrated The Legal Temple’s ability to use judicial mechanisms to protect the fundamental rights of elected officers against arbitrary power, emphasizing that student political processes must adhere strictly to the rule of law.