29 C
Monrovia
Saturday, February 15, 2025

Liberia: An Open Letter to Dr. Al-Hassan Conteh, Acting President, University of Liberia on the Imposition of Extra USD100 on Graduate Students – Part One

Must read

Dear Dr. Conteh,

I extend you my warmest of greetings and wish to pen a few things on the on-going brouhaha concerning the imposition of the unexplained USD100 on the graduating students of the Graduate and Professional Schools, a situation that has the propensity to bring the university’s name to public disrepute.

Dr. Conteh, although you have said continuously that the revelation is a lesson learnt and the university will correct it in the future, we believe intentionally refusing or delaying to correct the mistake or to do the right thing now is unhealthy.

How It All Started

Dr. Conteh, after the University of Liberia had announced its administration-decided graduation fee of USD380, the leadership of the graduating class of the Graduate and Professional Schools informed the students in our chat room that the graduate students would be paying an additional USD100, bringing the total amount to USD480. The class leadership informed us that the extra USD100 comprises the following items/activities, along with their apportioned amounts:

Class project ———————USD50.00

Class night————————USD20.00

Beach party———————-USD20.00

Sports day————————USD10.00

The class leadership said that these various activities and their associated amounts were decided by some students in a meeting held long before students could even start defending their thesis proposals, needless to mention defending their final theses.

In a sense, a small number of students made that decision when the majority of students didn’t even know whether they would graduate or not. Besides, the decision was made when the leadership had not even known the total number of students graduating.

The Reduction Debate

When the majority of the students reflected on the general economic hardship in the country, the projects/activities selected and their associated costs, the minority decision made in the absence of the leadership knowing the total number of students, and realizing that later that the total number of 300 and 400 students were being announced, the students began to indicate that the extra USD100 was too high.

Majority of the students suggested that the project fee should be reduced from USD50 to USD20 and that both the beach party and the sports day should be cancelled, bringing the graduation fee to USD420.

To convince the leadership that this was the majority’s decision, it was suggested that a survey/poll be conducted in the chat room so that people could vote, as was done with other issues and decisions; however, the class leadership refused.

This refusal on the part of the class leadership raised suspicions and created doubts, with most students wondering over the class leadership’s refusal to go by the majority rule and the reason behind their adamancy to have the graduation fee remain at USD480, instead of the USD420, especially where the various class projects/activities are for the class as a unit and not for the leadership and its committee members or supporters.

The class leadership’s desire to have the graduation fee remain at USD480 and its vehement refusal to conduct an open poll for the majority to decide did not perturb the students, as they continued to express their anger, displeasure, and determination to resist the class leadership’s bad leadership style. The debate continued unabated.

Then on August 28, 2024, the Secretary General of the class leadership, Mr. Wilfred Gonlor, wrote this as an announcement to the class in the chat room: “We don’t have the time and capacity for an online meeting now. It would be good for all of us to gather, interact, discuss, and plan our graduation. On the 29th of August, let’s meet and finalize all activities we intend to include in our graduation and decide on the cost.

Most students set and went for the meeting on the day announced.

However, to our outmost surprise, dismay, and disappointment, that is, instead of the class discussing and taking a decision on the activities to engage in and the costs associated with them, as was suggested by the SG, the class leadership introduced Assistant Dean Samuel Argbason who told the students that the extra USD100 was decided by UL administration and that we the students could do nothing about it, which statement caused anger and disappointment in the students, causing majority of the students to walk out of the meeting, accusing administration of conniving with the class leadership to rob them.

A raucous environment ensued.

The allegation against the university caused some of us who believed that the university would not choose to do the wrong thing to stand in defense of the university, contending that what the Dean was saying was misleading because the university cannot and would not be the one deciding a specific amount for the graduate students’ activities or projects. It is the students that can and must make that decision.

Our September 3 Meeting with You

I suppose in order to afford you the opportunity to hear from both parties – the class leadership and its supporters supporting the USD480 and those of us supporting the reduction to USD420 – met with you on Monday, September 3, 2024, in the President’s Conference Room.

Also present in that meeting, besides you, were Dean Sekou Konneh, Assistant Dean Samuel Argbason, and Cllr. Viama Blama, head of the university’s legal department.

To some extent, that meeting was held under good atmosphere although the class leadership and its supporters had earlier given you biased and skewed information in favor of the class leadership. Our presentation shifted the tide, causing you to institute two relevant developments as follows:

  1. Firstly, to find out whether it is true that the majority is in favor of reducing the graduation fee to USD420 or leaving it at USD480, you conducted an open quick poll in the conference hall in full view of all. Surprisingly, only members of the class leadership voted for the USD480, while majority of those present voted against the USD480. I am convinced the results painted a picture in your mind, which made you make an important proposal as indicated in point #2 below.
  2. Secondly, you suggested that the entire graduating class should meet in the auditorium of the university, specifically on Main Campus, the next day, Tuesday, September 4, at 4:PM, to take a democratic decision by giving everyone the opportunity to vote on the issue. You asked Cllr. Viama Blama to be present as an observer. You also said that you would like to be present as well, as you were interested in giving the students the chance to decide.

Dr. Conteh, I would like to end here for now. In Part 2, I will talk about how the September 4 meeting suggested by you were disrupted by apparently paid undergraduate students who was sent to deprive the graduate students the opportunity to vote on the USD480.

I will also indicate how the very students who disrupted the meeting are believed to have gone scot-free, as some of them have been seen interacting with both you and Dean Sekou Konneh the next day on the very university campus. Photos indicating this will be published in Part 2.

It is not an insinuation that you sent them to engage in violence, but we are shocked that they have neither been forwarded to the university security nor to the LNP for investigation. People should be taught that crime doesn’t pay!

To be continued…

Yours very sincerely,

Paul Yeenie Harry

Student

Latest article