By Samson Obande,  Lafia

The National Nasarawa State University, Keffi Alumni Association Worldwide, has dismissed a petition by a group styling itself “Concerned Members of the NSUK Alumni Association” as legally incompetent, speculative, and actionable under the Cybercrimes Act.

This was contained in a rebuttal issued by the Alumni legal adviser Barr. Daniel Eyyazo PhD in response to an “Open Letter to the Bar Nuhu Egya-led NSUK Alumni” authored by one M.A. Oche, Ph.D., which alleged constitutional violations, financial impropriety, nepotism, and administrative negligence against the current Executive Council.

Describing the publication as “a textbook example of bare assertions masquerading as facts,” Eyyazo said the petitioners failed to provide any evidence to back their claims.

“From its opening paragraph to its concluding demands, the publication is a textbook example of bare assertions masquerading as facts. It is trite law that he who asserts must prove,” Eyyazo stated.

He noted that while the petitioners alleged “constitutional violations, abuse of office, nepotism, financial impropriety, administrative negligence, and ethical misconduct,” they “conspicuously failed to identify a single constitutional provision allegedly breached, a single committee unlawfully constituted, a single financial transaction fraudulently undertaken, or a single decision declared unconstitutional by any competent organ of the Association or court of law.”

On allegations of improper committee constitution, the Legal Adviser said the Association’s Constitution expressly vests the Executive Council with administrative powers, including setting up committees.

“The Constitution of the Association expressly vests the Executive Council with administrative powers necessary for the day-to-day running of the Association, including the constitution of committees where necessary,” he said.

He also faulted claims that the EXCO boycotts Congress meetings, saying “attendance records, notices of meetings, and minutes will readily expose the falsity of this assertion.” On nepotism, he added: “No appointment has been shown to have violated the Constitution… Mere friendship with an officer does not disqualify an otherwise competent member.”

Eyyazo condemned references to members allegedly “under probe,” stressing the presumption of innocence. “A person under investigation remains innocent until found otherwise by the appropriate authority. To seek the removal of individuals solely on the basis of unproven allegations is not only legally untenable but morally reprehensible.”

He further said the Association’s finances are administered through established procedures and that allegations of financial opacity “should be supported by facts, figures, and documentary evidence, not sensationalism designed to incite public distrust.”

The Legal Adviser said the group failed to use internal dispute resolution mechanisms provided in the Constitution, opting instead for “media theatrics and public grandstanding.”

“Constitutional democracy is not sustained through sensational publications but through compliance with established legal procedures,” he said, urging the petitioners to present credible evidence before constitutional organs or a court.

Eyyazo concluded that the NSUAAW leadership views the publication as an act of sabotage and cyberbullying.

“The NSUAAW leadership equally view such conduct as cyberbullying and is punishable under the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act, 2015, as amended by the Cybercrimes (Amendment) Act, 2024,” he warned.

He reaffirmed the Executive Council’s commitment to “transparency, accountability, inclusiveness, and the advancement of the objectives of the Association,” adding: “The Executive Council will not be distracted by campaigns of misinformation.”