FATSSSA Press Sets the Record Straight in Response to FHR Public Release: A Pledge to Trust and Integrity

 

Editorial: Eniola Fase

On October 24, 2023, Honourable Hope, a distinguished member representing the Department of Psychology at the 400 level in the FATSSSA House of Representatives (FHR), posted a comprehensive public statement via the official NAPS (National Association of Psychology Students) WhatsApp group at 4:26 pm. The communication addressed the controversy surrounding the Social Director's purported inability to repay a loan amounting to 200,000 naira. Honourable Hope's statement delved into an interview conducted on this matter, as well as the subsequent opinion piece by the Faculty Press that swiftly followed the interview, providing a nuanced perspective on the unfolding situation.

While the FHR has done a great job giving a comprehensive side of its story, it is difficult to ignore the accusations thrown around, each like a nimble performer moving across the stage of discourse. “WE find it highly unprofessional for a faculty press to base their report and resolutions on an interview conducted by a private individual who runs his blog site for his personal interests. It is highly unethical, and this raises questions about the integrity, fairness, objectivity and professionalism of the press…”  the FHR denied a fellow lawmaker, referring to him as a ‘private individual’. It is absurd that because an Honourable member of the FHR conducted an interview for his personal gain, it is natural to question the significance of such an interview and then instead tag it as an interview conducted by a private individual. Honourable Joy Ohime is not a private individual! Despite disapproval from the House regarding his independent interview with the Social Director, it is essential to recognise him not only as a lawmaker within the FHR but also as a public figure. This acknowledgement underscores that irrespective of the platform used, the actions and words of Honourable Joy Ohime bear significant weight, given his role in the public sphere.

Furthermore, it is crucial to acknowledge that Honourable Joy Ohime was present during the FHR sitting where the verdict on the loan was rendered. Given his role, the expectation was for him to defend the honour of the FHR if any statements by Mr Ashcroft contradicted the truth. The absence of such defense suggests a level of assurance in the accuracy of Mr Ashcroft's claims.

Indeed, the press is driven by an unwavering commitment to uncovering the truth, refraining from fabricating stories for any motive. Published content is grounded in the involvement of the concerned parties. However, in opinion pieces, writers can incorporate personal perspectives while maintaining a foundation rooted in truth, ensuring a nuanced and transparent expression of viewpoints. In other words, the facts disseminated to the public hinge entirely on accessible testimonies scrutinised by the press. With robust evidence as our anchor, we steadfastly stand by our assertions. 

In their publication, the FHR mentioned that “After the approval, the social director indulged the house to grant a loan of ₦200,000 to kickstart the FATSSSA Crocs and Slides Picnic. This loan was intended for vendor deposits due to “potential delays” in ticket sales. He promised that the amount borrowed (₦200,000) would be reimbursed to the association’s account after realizing money from the ticket sales…” This claim goes against Mr. Ashcroft’s statement, which claims he never requested a loan from the FHR. Instead, the Speaker mentioned that the association is unable to fund the picnic and they can only loan Mr Ashcroft the sum of 200,000 naira to get things started with the picnic. In a recent call interview between a press correspondent and Mr. Ashcroft on October 24, 2023, by 4:43 pm, Mr. Ascroft clarified that he DID NOT request a loan from the FHR. 

According to Mr. Ashcroft, he proposed that half of the proposed budget be funded by the House, with the remaining half covered through ticket sales. The Speaker of the House explicitly stated that they anticipated the picnic not to be financed by the association's purse but from ticket sales. Mr. Ashcroft clarified that the House initiated the discussion about the loan, and he believes there may have been a mutual misunderstanding between both parties. This confusion may have arisen from the previous Social Director, Mr. Wole, assuring that he would solely fund the last session’s picnic through ticket sales, leading the House to expect a similar approach from Mr. Ashcroft. Mr. Ashcroft maintains his stance that he did not request a loan from the FHR, thereby refuting the assertion that he violated Article 20, Section (I) Sub-section IV of the revised FATSSSA Constitution. This article emphasises that no officer should breach the trust and confidence entrusted to them. In essence, based on Mr. Ashcroft's claims, he did not breach the trust vested in him. Clearly, the House thinks otherwise. 

While there might have been a misunderstanding between both parties, it is highly irresponsible for the House to shy away from every responsibility of this unfortunate incident, however, finding faults in every organ but themselves. With complete confidence, the press stands on the claim that the House violated the reviewed FATSSSA Constitution Chapter 4, Section (viii), subsection IV, which states, “The Social Director shall provide the Association with instruments of entertainment under the sponsorship of the Association and take charge of them.” It's no tradition that sales of tickets should duly finance social events, as it is evident that such an attempt last session led to nothing but a disaster. The tradition of funding social events through ticket sales, proven unsuccessful in the past, suggests the House's negligence in learning from history. In light of this repeated history, it's deemed responsible for the House to shoulder its share of responsibility along with other involved parties.