The Court of Appeal in Kumasi has annulled a controversial directive issued by the Vice-Chancellor of the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology (KNUST) that mandated a senior lecturer to apologize to two of his colleagues. This ruling was based on a determination that the decision violated principles of natural justice.
In a unanimous decision by a panel consisting of Justice K. Baiden, Justice Richard Mac Kogyapwah, and Justice John Bosco Nabareseset, the appellate court granted an appeal brought forth by Professor Rexford Assasie Oppong against the university’s Registrar. The court set aside a previous ruling from the High Court which had dismissed Prof. Oppong’s request for judicial review.
The situation originated in March 2023 when KNUST’s Vice-Chancellor, Prof. Rita Akosua Dickson, appointed a fact-finding committee led by Prof. Samuel I.K. Ampadu. This committee was established to investigate a petition from several senior members of the Department of Architecture, which accused Prof. Oppong, the then Head of Department, of harassment and misconduct, including unilateral decision-making and disruption of examinations.
In response, Prof. Oppong also lodged complaints against two faculty members, alleging insubordination and financial impropriety involving student fees for additional classes. The committee was tasked with examining both sets of claims and providing recommendations to the Vice-Chancellor.
Despite presenting both oral and documentary evidence to the committee, Prof. Oppong later expressed concerns that he was denied the opportunity to cross-examine his accusers. Following the committee’s findings, the Registrar communicated a directive in August 2024, which required Prof. Oppong to apologize to the two lecturers based on the committee’s conclusion that the allegations against them were unfounded.
Challenging this directive, Prof. Oppong argued that the committee’s character as a fact-finding body did not grant it the authority to impose disciplinary actions, including an apology. He noted that this process failed to adhere to the university’s established disciplinary protocols, thereby infringing upon his rights and limiting his ability to appeal.
The Court of Appeal concurred, stating that while the Vice-Chancellor had the right to create a committee and receive its recommendations, executing those recommendations as a form of disciplinary action required compliance with due process. Justice Baiden emphasized that the directive to apologize was not trivial, implying wrongdoing on Prof. Oppong’s part.
The court deemed the lack of adherence to procedural fairness a critical error. Although the remedy of certiorari is discretionary, the court deemed it necessary to intervene, given the potential for escalating conflict which could disrupt the university’s academic environment. Consequently, the court ordered the quashing of the Registrar’s letter that mandated Prof. Oppong’s apology and set aside the earlier High Court ruling delivered on January 15, 2024, without imposing any costs.
