Over 200 UNICAL Students Sue University for N5 Billion After Removal from Law Faculty

Over 200 students from the University of Calabar (UNICAL) in Cross River State have taken legal action against the university. They are also suing the vice-chancellor, the registrar, and President Bola Tinubu. The students are challenging their removal from the Faculty of Law and their transfer back to their original faculties and departments.

The students, 214 in total, filed the lawsuit on August 12 at the Federal High Court in Abuja. They are seeking N5 billion in damages.

In their suit, they claimed that their admission letters, payment of fees, course registration, examinations, and JAMB regularisation formed "valid, binding, and subsisting legal contracts" between them and the university.

They argued that Vice-Chancellor Offiong Offiong could not invalidate "the official acts, admissions, JAMB regularisation approvals, and institutional commitments made by his predecessor to the detriment of the Claimants."

Background of the Issue

The issue started this month when the University of Calabar instructed 214 second-year Law students to return to their original departments. Vanguard reported that this decision followed a meeting between the university management, the Faculty of Law, the affected students, and the Law Students’ Association of Nigeria, UNICAL chapter.

Mr Offiong stated that only 221 out of 435 students in the second year of the Bachelor of Laws (LL.B) programs were officially admitted into Law. The other 214 students had entered the faculty from other departments.

The university explained that these students would not qualify for the Nigerian Law School if they remained in Law under their current admission status. They temporarily locked the students' portals to allow for their transfer back to their original departments. The university also offered to refund their 2025/2026 school fees or provide free tuition for the 2026/2027 session in their original departments.

Students' Perspectives

In support of the suit, Ogana Lawrence Lukpata, the second claimant, mentioned that he was "personally affected by the administrative actions." He stated that the university admitted him and 213 other students into the Faculty of Law for the 2023/2024 and 2024/2025 academic sessions.

After their admission, he said the students accepted the offers, “paid acceptance fees, completed the required screening, and paid school fees for almost three academic years.” They registered for Law courses, attended lectures, submitted assignments, and took exams supervised by the university.

According to the affidavit, the students passed their exams and moved from 100 Level to 200 Level, with some reaching 300 Level. Mr Lukpata also said the university told them to complete JAMB regularisation, which they did after paying the necessary fees.

But problems arose when Mr Offiong became vice-chancellor and "refused to sign" or complete the regularisation documents processed by his predecessor, Florence Obi. Mrs Obi was vice-chancellor from December 2020 until she handed over to Mr Offiong on December 1, 2025.

The students said Mr Offiong claimed the forms did not have his name. They had to repeat the JAMB regularisation process and pay the fees again. On August 5, when the university management met with the Faculty of Law and the affected students, Mr Lukpata said Mr Offiong announced that “214 of the 435 students in the LL. B II class would be removed from the Faculty of Law.”

Locking of Portals

The affidavit states that the university locked the students’ academic result portals, cutting off their access to learning materials, academic transcripts, and ongoing university activities.

“The Respondents gave no prior query, notice of allegation, administrative panel hearing, or opportunity for any of the Claimants to defend their status before taking this extreme measure,” the affidavit noted. It also mentioned that none of the 214 students had faced investigations or been found guilty of misconduct.

The students questioned why the university officials, who managed their admissions and fee payments, were not held accountable.

“Instead of holding its staff accountable for administrative lapses, the university management singled out innocent students who acted in good faith and spent years studying law courses,” they stated in the affidavit.

Legal Questions

Through the suit signed by a group of lawyers led by Okpi Bernard, the students posed several questions for the court to resolve. One question was whether the vice-chancellor can "arbitrarily and unilaterally" invalidate official acts and admissions made by his predecessor.

They also asked if the university can, under Section 18 of the University of Calabar Act, demote or transfer students without first investigating them or finding them guilty.

Additionally, they asked if President Tinubu, as the appointing authority for the vice-chancellor, has a duty to intervene and stop the university from enforcing what they call unlawful decisions affecting their academic status.

Students' Demands

The students want the court to declare that their admission letters, acceptance of offers, payment of fees, course registrations, and compliance with JAMB regularisation requirements created valid contracts with the university.

They also want the court to state that the vice-chancellor cannot nullify official acts and admissions granted by his predecessor.

Furthermore, they want the court to declare that their removal from the Law faculty and locking of their academic portals violated their rights to fair hearing.

They are seeking a permanent injunction to stop the university, vice-chancellor, and registrar from taking actions against them as Law students. They also want the court to direct President Tinubu to oversee the university’s management.

Request for Protection

Along with the main suit, the students filed a motion for temporary protection while their case is pending. They asked for an injunction to prevent the university from enforcing the August 5 directive.

They also requested that the court order the university to restore their access to academic result portals and learning platforms. The motion further sought an injunction to stop any adverse academic actions against them.