Two hundred and fourteen students of the University of Calabar (UNICAL), Cross River State, have taken legal action against the institution and President Bola Ahmed Tinubu over their removal from the Faculty of Law.
The affected students filed a suit at the Federal High Court in Abuja, demanding N5 billion in damages over the university’s decision to transfer them from Law back to the faculties and departments where they were originally admitted.
The students, who filed the case on August 12, 2026, named the university, its Vice-Chancellor, Offiong Offiong, the Registrar and President Tinubu as defendants.
They argued that their admission letters, payment of acceptance and school fees, course registration, examinations and subsequent JAMB regularisation established valid agreements between them and the university.
The dispute began after the university announced that 214 students in the second-year LL.B programme were not officially admitted into the Faculty of Law. According to the institution, only 221 of the 435 students in the class were formally admitted to study Law, while the remaining students had transferred into the faculty from other departments.
The university subsequently directed the 214 students to return to their original departments, warning that they would not be eligible to proceed to the Nigerian Law School under their existing admission status.
The students, however, rejected the decision, insisting that they had been admitted, registered and allowed to study Law for several academic sessions without any indication that their status was invalid.
One of the students, Ogana Lawrence Lukpata, said in an affidavit that the affected students had accepted their admission offers, paid the required fees, completed screening and studied Law for nearly three years.
He said they attended lectures, completed assessments and examinations and progressed from 100 Level to 200 Level, with some students already reaching 300 Level.
According to him, the university later instructed the students to undergo JAMB regularisation, which they completed after paying the required fees.
The students alleged that complications arose after Offiong became Vice-Chancellor in December 2025. They claimed that he declined to complete some regularisation documents processed under his predecessor, Florence Obi, leading them to repeat the process and pay the associated fees again.
At a meeting on August 5 involving the university management, Faculty of Law representatives and the affected students, the students said they were informed that the 214 students would be removed from the Law programme and returned to their former departments.
They further alleged that their academic portals were subsequently locked, limiting their access to results, course registration, learning platforms and other university services.
The students argued that they were punished for administrative issues that were not of their making. They also said they were not given prior notice, queried, investigated or allowed to defend themselves before the decision was taken.
They therefore asked the court to determine whether the university could invalidate admissions and JAMB regularisation processes carried out under a former vice-chancellor.
They also questioned whether the institution could transfer or remove students from their programme and restrict their academic access without first establishing misconduct, academic dishonesty or another disciplinary offence.
The students are asking the court to recognise their admissions, fee payments, course registrations, examinations and JAMB regularisation as valid and binding.
They also want the court to stop the university from transferring, ejecting, demoting or otherwise taking adverse academic action against them.
In addition, they are seeking an order directing the university to restore their access to academic portals and learning platforms.
The students have also filed an application seeking interim protection while the substantive case is being determined. They want the court to temporarily suspend the university’s August 5 directive and prevent further actions that could affect their academic progress.
The legal battle now centres on whether the university was justified in reversing the students’ admission status after they had spent several academic sessions studying Law, paying fees and completing examinations under the institution’s supervision.
