London Metropolitan University To Face out Nigeria Students

August 30, 2012 

Hundreds of Nigerian students in London face deportation as London Metropolitan University has had their right to admit foreign students revoked.

Many of the international students speak of their deportation worries if not able to find a sponsor within 60 days, elombah.com reports.

“Some people come from poorer backgrounds… parents have sold their homes or land and made huge sacrifices to get them here,’ says London Met student facing deportation.

Lilian Owhor, 20, from Nigeria, is about to start her second year reading forensic science.
She said, “I’m really worried because this is my future.

“I have come in today to get my transcripts, as I will have to see if I can transfer to another university.

“I haven’t been very happy since yesterday. My friends have told me to have hope.

“The university have said they would help us. I contacted them yesterday before the final decision was announced but I haven’t spoken to anyone yet today.

“I haven’t told my parents. I am just hoping I don’t have to go back to Nigeria. My fees are around £11,000 per year. I have already spent a lot of money on my education here.”

Emmanuel Egwu, 24 from Nigeria is the international student officer at the university’s student union and about to begin his third year reading forensic science.

He said, “I have lost my job, not just my place at this university. I came over here in 2009 and I have invested a huge amount in this university.

“My role within the Union means I represent the students affected. More than 2,600 students studying here are about to face two options: they can look for another place in another university or they can leave.

“People have been ringing me all morning from their homes in Nigeria and India asking me what they should do. I have to explain to them that they have to stay calm and they can call whenever they need me.

“They will receive a letter from UKBA who will tell them they have 60 days to find a solution. 
“This is devastating, some people come from poorer backgrounds and their parents have sold their homes or land and made huge sacrifices to get them here.

“I’m feeling very bitter. I can’t believe that they can do this to international students. It poses a serious threat to UK higher education.”

Egwu said the students affected were planning to meet with the vice chancellor of the university laterThursday (today).

“We’ll see what he has to say,” he added.

He said they also hope to plan a peaceful protest.

Syed Rumman, 26, graduated from the university last year. He studied law and is now the vice president of education at the student union and student governor of the university.

He said: “I require a T4 visa to work for the university so I will have to leave my job.

“I’m angry, I’m devastated, I’m speechless but on the other hand this is a wider issue, because this is the first time that T4 sponsorship places have been revoked at a UK university.

“There are lots of questions in my mind.

“But on a practical level, where are all these students going to go? You see on the news that people doing their A-Levels have found it hard to go to the universities they want to go to.

“I just don’t know what is going to happen. It’s in the middle of their studies, some of them will be submitting research projects of the summer, things will be unfinished. It’s a bombshell.”

London Metropolitan University’s HTS status was suspended last month while UKBA examined alleged failings.

A statement posted on the university’s website Wednesday night reads, “The implications of the revocation are hugely significant and far-reaching, and the university has already started to deal with these. It will be working very closely with the UKBA, Higher Education Funding Council for England, the NUS and its own Students’ Union.

“Our absolute priority is to our students, both current and prospective, and the university will meet all its obligations to them.”

The NUS on Wednesday contacted Prime Minister David Cameron and Home Secretary Theresa May to “express anger at the way decisions have been made in recent weeks and to reiterate the potentially catastrophic effects on higher education as a £12.5 billion per year export industry for the UK.”

NUS president Liam Burns said, “It is disgusting that international students continue to be used as a political football by politicians who seem either incapable of understanding, or are simply uncaring about the impact of their decisions on individuals, universities and the UK economy.

“This decision will create panic and potential heartbreak for students not just at London Met but also all around the country.

“Politicians need to realise that a continued attitude of suspicion towards international students could endanger the continuation of higher education as a successful export industry.

“This heavy-handed decision makes no sense for students, no sense for institutions and no sense for the country. This situation and the botched process by which the decision was arrived at could be avoided if international students were not included in statistics of permanent migrants.”

A UKBA spokesman said, “London Metropolitan University’s licence to sponsor non-EU students has been revoked after it failed to address serious and systemic failings that were identified by the UK Border Agency six months ago.

“We have been working with them since then, but the latest audit revealed problems with 61 per cent of files randomly sampled. Allowing London Metropolitan University to continue to sponsor and teach international students was not an option.

“These are problems with one university, not the whole sector. British universities are among the best in the world – and Britain remains a top class destination for top class international students.

“We are doing everything possible, working with Universities UK, to assist genuine students that have been affected.”

Keith Vaz, chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee, said the move could harm Britain’s reputation as a prime destination for overseas students.

Teen kills uncle for shutting down her internet

Taipei -A Taiwan teenager allegedly stabbed her uncle to death on Wednesday because he shut down her internet to stop her from staying online late into the night.

The 19-year-old, identified only by her surname Lin, was taken into custody in Miaoli County in the north-west of the island after she allegedly stabbed her uncle in the stomach with a 29-centimetre knife, according to the semi-official Central News Agency.

Based on their initial investigation, the police said the teen was connecting to the internet around 2 am when her uncle shut the power down. An argument ensued, and the teen pulled out the knife.

The 37-year-old uncle, whose name was not released, died of his wounds in a local hospital.
Lin’s grandmother, who also lived in the home, said the uncle had a bad temper, and would shut down the power of the house occasionally while Lin was surfing the web because he was annoyed that she stayed up so late.

A representative from Miaoli’s prosecutors office declined to comment on the case, but said a murder conviction in Taiwan carries a penalty ranging from 10 years in prison to a death sentence. (dpa/NAN)

How ex-General’s daughter, Cynthia, was killed by facebook ‘friends’

IKEJA— Indications emerged, Tuesday, that the late Cynthia Osokogu, the only daughter of General Frank  Osokogu (rtd), whose  body was discovered in a Lagos morgue a month after she was declared missing, could have been murdered by her facebook acquaintances.

Already, six persons, among them two  university students, a pharmacist and an employee of the hotel where the 24-year-old post-graduate student was murdered have been arrested.

Investigation into the murder, as reliably gathered, revealed that Cynthia was strangled to death in the hotel by her assailants, who thereafter left with an undisclosed amount, her student identity card and phones.
Report said the beautiful and vivacious Cynthia had chatted with the two undergraduates on facebook for months.

In the process, they reportedly got to know that she owned a boutique in Nasarawa State, following which they reportedly had a business proposal with her, promising  to host her whenever she visited Lagos.
On her arrival at the Murtala Muhammed Airport, Ikeja, on July 22, 2012, she was reportedly picked up by the two undergraduates  and driven to a hotel in Festac Town. Unknown to her, she was embarking on a journey of no return.

At the hotel, her drink was reportedly drugged before she was strangled to death. Vanguard reliably gathered that after her death, one of her assailants  left the room and later put a call to the hoteliers, informing them that there was a corpse in one of the rooms.

The hotel, as gathered, took the corpse to the Isolo General Hospital mortuary. Sources informed that efforts by the hoteliers to contact family of the deceased proved abortive as there was reportedly nothing to trace her close relatives or friends.

Meanwhile, back in Nasarawa State where her family is said to be based, apprehension had set in following her disappearance. She was, therefore, declared missing, with her pictures dropped at some police divisions in the state.

How the suspects were arrested 

Vanguard reliably gathered that after the murder,  the killers deleted all information and chats with the deceased from their facebook. But, along the line, the deceased phone was  dialled and one of the suspects reportedly answered. When  the call log was checked from the service provider, the receiver was traced to Festac Town in the Amuwo-Odofin Local Government Area.

Again, the Close Circuit Television stationed in the hotel was said to have revealed identities of the killers following which two of them  were arrested and their confessional statement led to the arrest of others.
During interrogation, the suspects reportedly confessed to have bought the drugs with which they drugged Cynthia’s drink  from a pharmacist, thereby leading  to his arrest. It was at this point that her family was reportedly  contacted.

Vanguard reliably gathered that during investigation, the two undergraduates, whose identities could not be ascertained,  confessed to have killed Cynthia.

They also reportedly confessed to belong to a syndicate which specialised in luring unsuspecting  rich women with the aim of dispossessing them of their belongings, particularly cash.

The late Cynthia, as gathered, was not their first victim, as they were said to have confessed to the police that she was their sixth victim.

When contacted, spokesman for the Lagos State Police Command, Ngozi Braide, confirmed the arrest, but was not forthcoming with details.

 Story By Vanguard Newspapers' Evelyn Usman

The Lagos Road Traffic Law

Lagos State Governor, Mr. Babatunde Fashola, recently took a drastic step in the effort to ease traffic flow and improve road safety in the state with the signing into law of a new traffic legislation. Tagged Lagos Road Traffic Law, the legislation prohibits driving against traffic and eating, smoking or making phone calls while driving. Other offences under the law, which will soon be operational in the state, are refusal to obey traffic lights and road signs, and driving without valid drivers’ licences.

The law also restricts movement of commercial motorcycles known as okada to between 6 a.m and 8 p.m only, while they are banned from major roads such as Lagos – Ibadan Expressway, Ikorodu Road, Apapa – Oshodi Expressway, the Victoria Island – Lekki – Epe Expressway and all bridges, such as the Third Mainland Bridge. Articulated vehicles, with the exception of fuel tankers and long passenger buses, are banned from all roads in the state between 6 a.m and 9 p.m., while picking and dropping of passengers at unauthorised places, and sale of alcohol at motor parks, are also proscribed.

Infractions of these provisions attract stiff penalties such as community service, hefty fines, impounding of vehicles and jail terms. These sanctions have since become a subject of controversy in the state. There is no arguing the fact that Lagos’ legendary intractable traffic gridlocks demand bold action from the state authorities.

Traffic hold ups exact a huge toll in the state. They are responsible for avoidable waste of valuable man-hours, and also contribute to rising rates of road accidents. Traffic jams impact negatively on the health of commuters, even as they constitute a huge drain on the economy. The gridlocks are largely caused by flagrant disregard of traffic laws and ethics, although bad roads and flooding during the raining season also play a role.

The decision to tackle the traffic problem in the state through stiff legislation is, therefore, commendable. Such laws are unavoidable if the Lagos metropolis, in particular, is not to be ground to a halt by unruly motorists. But, while it is necessary to guide the conduct of drivers in the state with stringent laws, the sanctions prescribed under the new legislation are draconian. For example, the law provides for a fine of N20,000 for first offenders of some of the provisions, N30,000 for subsequent offences, or three years imprisonment or both subsequently for offenders.

Defaulting articulated vehicles such as trailers will be impounded while drivers of such vehicles will pay N50,000 fine or be liable to imprisonment for six months. These are unduly harsh provisions. There is no justification at all for impounding of vehicles for traffic offences, because the offender may not necessarily be the owner of the vehicle. It is also improper to impound vehicles from motorists who present fake documents, as the law states, especially when such documents are obtained from the appropriate authorities. Beyond the stringency of the law, however, is the lack of adequate road signs to guide motorists on use of roads in the state. A state that wants to enforce severe sanctions for traffic law infractions must provide road signs to guide motorists.

Necessary road signs and directions must not only be provided, law enforcement officers in the state must be trained to guide motorists, and not to lay ambush for them as is the practice today. Law enforcement officers must abide by the law and demonstrate high sense of responsibility in its implementation. The essence of the law should be to ensure road safety and ease traffic flow and not to apprehend offenders in order to extort bribes, or fine or jail them.

This is why the state must not be hasty in implementation of the law. Let all the necessary road signs be put in place. Officials of the Lagos State Traffic Management Agency (LASTMA) should be properly trained and orientated and motorists educated on the provisions of the law through vigorous enlightenment campaigns. While we commend some aspects of the law such as the restrictions on operations of commercial motorcyclists and trailers, we are concerned that the new law appears to violate Section 42 (1) of the
Nigerian Constitution in that it prescribes for Lagos State a law that is different from those applicable to people in other states.

That section of the Constitution states that: “A citizen of Nigeria of a particular community… shall not, by reason only that he is such a person, be subjected either expressly by, or in the practical application of any law in force in Nigeria … to disabilities or restrictions to which citizens of Nigeria in other communities … are not made subject.” Moreover, aspects of the new trafffic law offend the principle of Federalism in that they restrict movement of certain categories of vehicles on mostly Federal roads such as the Lagos-Ibadan Expressway, which are not within the jurisdiction of Lagos State government.

This is a glaring anomaly. Beyond enforcement of this law, we advise the Lagos government to put roads in the state in good motorable condition, to reduce traffic gnarls that push motorists into driving against traffic in the first place. The law, though good in a few aspects, is too draconian. Many of its provisions, especially those relating to jail terms and seizure of vehicles, should be reviewed.

Culled from the Sun newspapers Editorial, August 12, 2012

OUR FIRST LADY THE PERMANENT SECRETARY

DESPITE desperate attempts to explain and justify it, the appointment of the wife of the President, Patience Jonathan, as permanent secretary in the Bayelsa State civil service is an abuse of process, abuse of office and totally without merit. It is not surprising that the appointment has attracted public criticisms on grounds of propriety. Mrs. Jonathan has already taken the oath of office, putting paid to expectations that she might turn down the controversial appointment. That act of taking the oath even magnifies the impropriety of the wife of a serving president, already playing full ceremonial role at the presidency as the First Lady, being so elevated; more so as she has been out of her career job for more than 13 years, ostensibly on leave of absence.

The Governor of Bayelsa State, Mr. Seriake Dickson, affirmed that the appointment of Dame Patience as permanent secretary, along with 18 others, was done in a transparent manner and after due consultations with stakeholders. He further said the process was devoid of lobbying, as those elevated were selected from a list of the most senior civil servants in each of the eight local councils of the state. Besides, the exercise, he emphasised, was in accordance with the constitutional power conferred on the governor.

On her part, the First Lady insisted that she deserved the promotion, being a teacher in the state’s civil service who had been on leave of absence since 1999 when her husband became the deputy governor of the state. She reasoned further that since the position of the First Lady was not constitutional, she needed to express her career in the civil service and be entitled to retirement benefit upon leaving the service.

Notwithstanding the justifications, the development provokes a number of pertinent questions: What relevant bureaucratic experience has the First Lady to merit her appointment? What is her portfolio? How does her appointment interface with her extra-constitutional role as First Lady? So far, no one has provided the answers. It is beyond doubt that Mrs. Jonathan has no bureaucratic experience for the position she has been elevated to, and since it is a nominal appointment without any formal portfolio, what point does the governor intend to prove by the appointment?

The governor’s insistence that the appointment was done on merit and that he only exercised his constitutional powers is face-saving, certainly not reconcilable with the fact of the act being an aberration, meant only to curry the president’s favour or goodwill. It smacks of an attempt by the governor at ingratiating himself to the president, given the controversy of his emergence as governor of Bayelsa State. Ordinarily in most civil service regulations, officers on secondment or leave of absence, upon return, sit for promotion examination and if successful, are granted apposite notional promotion to bring them to the levels of their colleagues.

It may be argued that past first ladies such as Mrs. Fati Abubakar and Mrs. Mary Odili had been caught in a similar political-cum-moral web. To be sure, their cases were different from the present one. For example, Justice Fati Abubakar, who was a High Court judge in her native Niger State, remained on her job despite her husband, Gen. Abdusalami Abubakar, becoming the head of state. This was under a military dictatorship, and no organ of government played sycophancy to the head of state by elevating his wife to some unearned portfolio. Mrs. Odili was professionally focused as Justice of Appeal Court and hardly played the Rivers State’s first lady role, a fact that ensured her career growth and subsequent elevation to the Supreme Court.

Above all, the development points up the ethical component of the state. The ethical state must ensure social justice; it must be accountable to the people; it must be sensitive to the public perception and feelings and it must be self-effacing. In doing so, the state earns its legitimacy and maintains hegemony of sorts. The First Lady’s appointment ignores the ethical side of the state and its responsibility. The governor betrays ignorance of the fact that leadership is a position of pre-eminence, not one to be trivialised. By appointing Mrs. Jonathan a permanent secretary, Dickson trivialised his office. The mere reliance on provisions of the 1999 Constitution, without a corresponding judicious use of his powers therein regarding the appointment to the State Civil Service, is simply disingenuous. President Jonathan on his part ought to have advised against it, as the decision constitutes a moral burden on the image of the presidency.

Despite the oath of office, the appointment can still be reversed. As the Scottish bard, William Shakespeare once opined: “For many an error by the same example, will rush into the st.”

Therefore, the rascality of the ‘African big man’ should not be tolerated in a democratic dispensation, as it is insulting to the sensibility of the people.

Culled from the Guardian Newspaper Editorial July 30 2012