By: Abu-Ubaida Ibrahim Kuna.
As a student of knowledge who cares deeply about the integrity of Nigeria’s education system, the credibility of its academic processes, and the dignity of the university community, I took time to revisit the facts in a deliberate fact-finding effort to understand the true status of this claim. This is important not only for clarity but also for those who may be easily impressed by titles without questioning the substance behind them. Not everyone who bears a title has necessarily earned recognition as an intellectual authority; in some cases, titles can be used to create a perception of achievement that does not reflect a completed academic journey.
In 2021, the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) released a detailed investigative report into the controversial appointment of Dr. Isa Ali Ibrahim Pantami as Professor of Cyber Security at the Federal University of Technology, Owerri (FUTO). The report was clear, categorical, and unambiguous in its conclusions. It rejected the legitimacy of that professorship. Yet, years later, Pantami continues to publicly bear and project the title of “Professor,” as though those findings never existed. This makes it necessary to restate a simple but important point: the professorial claim remains fundamentally disputed and widely discredited within Nigeria’s academic community.
ASUU’s investigation found that Pantami did not meet the minimum requirements for appointment to the rank of professor. At the time of the appointment, he reportedly had only about one year of post-PhD teaching experience, far below the widely accepted standard within Nigerian universities. He had not progressed through the established academic ranks of Senior Lecturer and Reader, which traditionally precede a professorial appointment. In a system where academic advancement is built on years of teaching, research, and mentorship, this deviation raised immediate and serious concerns.
Beyond qualification, the report identified significant procedural irregularities. The appointment process, which typically involves multiple layers of rigorous evaluation and can take years, was said to have been concluded in approximately three months. Key stages such as departmental assessments, external reviews, and plagiarism checks were reportedly bypassed or inadequately conducted. These lapses undermined the credibility of the process and suggested that due diligence may not have been observed.
The report also pointed to gaps in academic engagement and leadership. There was no verifiable record of doctoral supervision, no evidence of substantial academic administrative responsibility, and limited indication of the scholarly leadership expected at the professorial level. Additionally, concerns were raised about transparency, as critical documents, including assessors’ reports and detailed publication records were reportedly not made available for proper scrutiny.
ASUU did not merely highlight these issues; it took a firm position. The union recommended that the appointment be rejected, that Pantami should not be recognized as a professor across Nigerian universities, and that those involved in the process be sanctioned. These recommendations were not casual observations but institutional conclusions from the most influential academic body in the country.
This is not merely a revelation; it is a matter of concern for anyone interested in cleaning up Nigeria’s education and academic system. A university system must not descend into a situation where standards are weakened to the point that its qualifications are compared unfavorably with systems where academic rigor is often questioned. A professorial title is not symbolic, it must be earned through clearly defined stages, sustained scholarship, and verifiable contributions to knowledge.
This is why the continued use of the title “Professor” in this context raises serious ethical questions. Academic titles are not honorary labels to be assumed at will; they are earned through a rigorous and transparent process that reflects years of intellectual contribution, teaching, and service. When such a title is conferred under questionable circumstances and subsequently rejected by a credible academic authority, continuing to use it risks undermining the integrity of the entire system.
Five years after the ASUU report, its findings remain on record, neither withdrawn nor conclusively overturned. Ignoring them does not erase them. If anything, the persistence of the controversy reinforces the need for accountability and restraint. There is a responsibility to respect the weight of that report and to refrain from projecting a title that remains fundamentally challenged.
At stake is more than one individual’s title. It is the credibility of Nigeria’s academic system and the value placed on merit. The principle remains simple: titles must reflect truth, not convenience. Until that standard is upheld, reminders such as this will continue to be necessary.
For those seeking to understand the issue in full, the ASUU report speaks for itself. Readers are encouraged to carefully examine the attached images of the report and draw informed conclusions based on its documented findings.
Abu-Ubaida Ibrahim Kuna is an advocate of the Better Nigerian Education System (BNES), committed to promoting integrity, merit, and accountability within Nigeria’s academic and educational institutions.
