lasuconscience
In the first part of this report card, we examined the Presidency, the three Vice Presidents, the Secretariat, and the Social Director. We turn now to the offices that carried the weight of student welfare, communication, finance, sport, and the law.
Some of these offices had their moments. Others spent an entire session in a silence that students are still trying to make sense of.
COMRADE AKANO ABDULMALIK KOLADE AKA 5STAR — PUBLIC RELATIONS OFFICER
The LASUSU constitution is explicit about what the Public Relations Officer exists to do. The PRO shall “be the mouthpiece of the Union.” The PRO shall “be responsible for the proper dissemination of information to members of the Union as relating to the Union.” The PRO shall “prepare press releases of Union activities with the approval of the SEC.” Three clauses, one unmistakable message: this office lives and dies by how well, and how quickly, it tells students what they need to know.
To 5STAR’s credit, he showed early promise. Before the administration was even inaugurated, he hosted the LASU Xperience – Freshers’ Guide, which reportedly attracted over 1,600 listeners, and the office later organized a Public Relations Orientation aimed at strengthening communication across campus. These were the actions of someone who understood, at least in theory, what the job required.
In practice, the tenure told a different story. By LASU Conscience’s own count, the number of press releases and broadcasts from his office since his inauguration on October 13, 2025, has not reached 20, a strikingly thin output set against a session that was anything but quiet. Time and again, LASUites were left to piece information together from rumour and forwarded messages before an official word ever arrived, if it arrived at all.
A few episodes make the point better than any statistic. When the LIDC creation process for 100-level students reportedly commenced, no official clarification came from the PRO’s office. Into that vacuum rushed unverified claims — that the process worked “differently” this time, that certain individuals had to be paid before it could be completed, and some students reportedly did pay, for a process they could ordinarily have completed themselves. A single timely clarification could have shut that door before it opened.
During the CBT examinations, students raised concerns ranging from delays at entry to allegations of harassment and inappropriate physical checks during security screening. The only response from the PRO’s office was a WhatsApp status that lasted less than 24 hours. When resumption dates became a source of confusion following a shift in the examination calendar, with students and lecturers alike unsure whether academic activities had officially resumed, the office’s contribution to the moment was a “Welcome Back To School LASUites” graphic, released on March 9, 2026, at the exact moment final-year students were buckling under project deadlines, LIDC pressure, and registration anxiety. Students did not need a graphic. They needed information.
There is also the matter of priorities. The volume of event graphics pushed out under this administration has, by LASU Conscience’s assessment, outpaced the volume of actual press releases since inauguration, an imbalance that invites an uncomfortable question about whether the office of the mouthpiece of the Union spent more time amplifying entertainment than addressing the issues that kept students up at night. And when confronted about how information was being disseminated, 5STAR pointed to a LASUSU Substack account that, at the time, had not crossed 500 subscribers, claiming it had been used to inform newly admitted students about medical screening, a claim that did not hold up to scrutiny.
None of this erases the genuine effort visible in the office’s early engagement work. But appreciation cannot substitute for accountability, and a PRO’s worth is not measured in graphics produced but in whether LASUites receive the right information, at the right time, in a form they can act on. The incoming PRO Comr. Jinadu Jamiu, should treat verified, timely communication, even a simple “we are aware and looking into it” as the baseline, not the exception, and should resist the temptation to let publicity work double as substantive communication.
WELFARE DIRECTOR, OJO — ADEPEGBA ADEREMILEKUN AKA RIMEX
Rimex took over the Ojo Welfare Directorate at a difficult time, rising prices nationwide, worsening security on campus, and a student body that badly needed an office capable of real intervention, not just condolences.
There were early signs of effort. He visited security offices within and outside Ojo Local Government to build working relationships, organized the LASUSU Trade Fair, and joined the wider administration in a peaceful protest demanding justice following the death of a 300-level student. These were the actions of an office trying to show up.
But transport welfarism, a flaw inherited from the 35th administration, remained an unresolved thorn throughout his tenure. When the cost of fuel pushed campus shuttle prices from ₦100 to ₦200 upon resumption, a reduced price of ₦150 was negotiated with shuttle operators, but enforcement never followed. A chronic, and conveniently persistent, lack of ₦50 change meant drivers routinely collected the full ₦200 anyway, nullifying the negotiated price and leaving students stranded, a pattern LASU Conscience documented in our feature “LASU Shuttle Fare Hike Sparks Student Frustration Over ₦50 Change” (Read here). A negotiated price that is never enforced is not a welfare win. It is a headline that outlived its substance.
This was not an isolated lapse. When new fees were introduced at the start of the session, students complained for a while before the Welfare Director said anything, and even then, only after LASU Conscience published an editorial voicing the agitation directly (Read here). When campus security worsened, with reported cases of robbery, missing students, and constant power outages, the office stayed silent. When school authorities gave students just one week to pay fees and register courses despite delayed NELFund disbursements, and panic over the risk of being dropped from the system spread across campus, the Welfare Director was, once again, nowhere to be found. It reached a point where LASU Conscience had to ask the hard questions directly, in an editorial titled “IGBEGA LASUSU: Are Lasuites Still the Priority of the 36th Administration?” (Read here), a question this office, more than any other, should have been answering on its own.
The most disappointing chapter of his tenure, however, concerns student safety. When a gunshot killed Tife, a 200-level History student, all the Union offered were condolence posts and “Rest in Peace” messages. As with the earlier death of the 300-level student, the Union went quiet within days, leaving students with no clarity on whether justice had actually been pursued. What made this sting even more was the reported rebranding of the Welfare Director’s own support group, from “Justice for Azeezat” to “Rimex for LASUSU President” in under a month. Whatever the intention behind that shift, the optics were damning: a campaign for a dead student’s justice appeared to double as a campaign for personal political ambition.
We would also be remiss not to raise the harassment of students at the university’s CBT testing centre, where students were reportedly barred from sitting their exams over an allegation as absurd as not wearing a bra. This, too, fell squarely within the Welfare Director’s docket, and it, too, went unaddressed.
Rimex was not entirely absent this session, but on the issues that mattered most, safety, transport, fees, security, his office consistently arrived late, or not at all. The next Ojo Welfare Director should understand that welfare is not a reactive office; it is the one office students should never have to wait on.
WELFARE DIRECTOR, IKEJA — SALAU AMEERAH
Salau Ameerah’s tenure as Welfare Director for the Ikeja campus stands as one of the more encouraging stories in this report card. She founded the first-ever Pad Bank initiative at LASUCOM, addressing an essential health and hygiene need that had gone unmet for far too long, and organized a Social Media Accelerator programme that equipped students with practical digital skills.
These are not small achievements. They reflect an understanding of welfare as something broader than crisis response, an office that thinks about dignity and skill-building, not just complaints and emergencies.
That said, welfare is a continuous responsibility, not a single campaign. The Pad Bank and the Accelerator programme set a genuinely high standard, but the real test is whether these systems stay active and accessible long after the initial launch buzz fades, and this is also the campus where students have voiced concerns about the sharp rise in rent, an issue that called for closer visible coordination between the Welfare office and the Vice President than students were able to see this session.
We urge the incoming Welfare Director to keep these support systems running, maintain the health advocacy already established, and work hand-in-hand with the Ikeja Vice Presidency on the housing pressures that increasingly define student life on that campus.
WELFARE DIRECTOR, EPE — RAHEEM DAVID
Raheem David inherited a role that, on the Epe campus, comes loaded with distinct and often unglamorous challenges, hostel conditions, inconsistent electricity, inadequate basic amenities, and transportation troubles that rarely make it into wider campus conversation.
Effort was visible in handling the daily needs of engineering and agriculture students on the campus. But as we noted when reviewing the Epe Vice Presidency, this was also a session in which parts of Epe reportedly went for over a month without light, and hostel and housing conditions remained a persistent complaint, and on both counts, the Welfare Director’s office was no more visible than the Vice President’s. Welfare on a campus like Epe cannot be measured by good intentions alone; it has to be measured by whether stable power, clean water, and liveable hostels are actually within closer reach at the end of a tenure than they were at the start. By that measure, this was a quiet session on the issues that mattered most.
We urge the incoming Epe Welfare Director to build a clearer, more visible strategy, direct engagement with the student body, documented pressure on the university over power and housing, and consistent updates so that Epe students, for once, don’t feel like an afterthought in their own Union.
EKUN FOLASHADE — SPORTS DIRECTOR
Of all the offices reviewed in this report card, the Sports Directorate under Ekun Folashade delivered one of the more consistent records of activity. Under her leadership, LASUSU hosted the first-ever Inter-Campus Championship, alongside the LASUSU Freshers’ Game and the Pre-Freshers’ League, and she led LASU’s athletes to NUGA, where they returned with 39 medals across various competitions.
These are genuinely commendable results, and the office deserves recognition for them.
Still, a Sports Director’s mandate extends beyond the athletes already competing. The deeper test of the role is whether it draws non-athletes into sport and builds a culture that outlives any single tournament or medal count. Winning medals and hosting leagues is good; building a lasting sports culture on campus is what actually counts in the long run, and that broader work remains largely undone.
We urge the incoming Sports Director to build on this foundation, invest in publicity that reaches beyond the athletic circle already in the loop, bring more students into the fold, and create structured training programmes for beginners. Sport should not be a closed competition for those already good at it; it should be a vision the whole student body is invited into.
OLUBORI MUIZ — FINANCIAL SECRETARY
Financial transparency in student unionism is not a nice-to-have; it is written directly into the LASUSU constitution, which mandates that the Financial Secretary “publish the union’s statement of account every month,” so students can see exactly how their Union’s money moves.
Under the 36th administration, this basic constitutional duty simply did not happen. At no point during Olubori Muiz’s tenure was a statement of account made available to the wider student body. This is not a minor oversight, it is the single most direct measure of whether an elected financial officer is doing the one thing the constitution explicitly requires of him, and on that measure, the answer is no.
Handling accounts competently behind the scenes is only half the job. An office built on trust cannot ask students to simply take its word for it, particularly when the constitution itself spells out exactly how that trust is supposed to be earned. We urge the incoming Financial Secretary to break this now-familiar cycle: publish the statement of account regularly, as the constitution requires, and ensure that every programme promised to students is followed through with the same transparency being asked of the office itself.
ADEBIMPE QUDUS — LEGAL DIRECTOR
The Legal Director is the Chief Law Officer of the Union, the office charged with protecting the constitution, advising the Executive Council, defending students’ rights, and keeping the administration within legal bounds. It is, by design, one of the most consequential seats in the entire Students’ Executive Council.
Adebimpe Qudus took over this office after arguably its most turbulent chapter yet, a 35th administration in which the Ministry of Justice was simultaneously one of the most active offices in the Union and the centre of a suspension scandal that reached the LASUSU High Court. Whatever one makes of that chapter, it was, at minimum, visible. Students could point to what the office had done, right down to specific rulings and specific letters of legal clarification.
The 36th Ministry of Justice offers no such record. Throughout Qudus’s tenure, there has been a noticeable absence of public updates, legal awareness campaigns, or documented achievements that students can point to. This does not necessarily mean the office did nothing, a great deal of legal advisory work happens quietly, in rooms students never see. But an office this important cannot operate as a black box. When the custodian of the Union’s laws and the protector of students’ rights is this quiet, students are left with no way of knowing whether either is actually being safeguarded.
We urge the incoming Legal Director to be considerably more visible, not necessarily louder, but more present through legal literacy programmes, clearer public engagement on students’ rights, and a Ministry of Justice that students can actually see functioning, rather than one they have to take entirely on faith.
ARIKIBE ANITHA JESSICA — TREASURER
The Treasurer occupies one of the most sensitive seats in the Union, carrying the responsibility of ensuring LASUSU’s finances are properly managed and that students have real confidence in how those resources are handled.
To her credit, Arikibe Anitha Jessica’s tenure showed a deliberate effort to make financial literacy accessible to students rather than treating the office as purely administrative. The Financial and Sustainability Summit 4.0, organized alongside the Financial Secretary’s office, created a platform for conversations around savings, taxation, and financial responsibility, complete with speakers and a panel session. The office also co-ran The Millionaire Quest (Quick Wit Battle 2026), a more playful but no less deliberate attempt to get students engaging with financial ideas.
These initiatives deserve genuine credit. They suggest an office that understood financial leadership within a Students’ Union should not be confined to managing figures behind closed doors, particularly at a time when many students are already navigating serious financial pressure of their own.
However, programming is not the same as accountability, and this is where the Treasurer’s record runs into the same wall as the Financial Secretary’s. This is not a new complaint, LASU Conscience raised the same concern about the 34th administration’s finances, and reported outright silence when the 35th administration was asked, through the General Secretary, to make its statement of account public. That the same question has to be asked a third administration in a row says less about any one officer and more about a financial culture within LASUSU that has never been forced to change. With the Ilera-Eko and library development fees generating real concern this session, and NELFund confusion leaving many students seeking clarity, the absence of a clear, regularly published account of the Union’s finances is not a technicality, it is the exact information students needed most and were never given.
The Treasurer’s office has shown what genuine financial engagement with students can look like. The next standard it must be held to is ensuring that engagement is matched, at last, by the transparency and regular reporting the constitution has always required.
Across these eight offices, the same thread that ran through Part One resurfaces here, sharper than before: it was rarely a lack of ideas or ability that held this administration back. It was the follow-through, the statement of account never published, the safety pledge that faded into silence, the welfare office that answered only after the press did the asking first. Two administrations in a row now, the same financial transparency question has gone unanswered. That is no longer an oversight; it is a pattern the 37th administration inherits, and one students will be watching closely to see broken.
To the incoming officers stepping into these seats: you are not walking into a blank slate. You are walking into a students’ union with a documented list of unresolved promises, a financial reporting culture that three administrations running have failed to fix, and a student population that has grown fluent in the difference between a press release and an actual resolution. Meet that with more than good intentions. Publish the statement of account without being asked twice. Pay what has been promised, when it has been promised. Answer for a crisis before the press has to answer for you.
To LASUites: hold whoever occupies these offices next to this same standard, not just at the point of election, but throughout their tenure. A report card only matters if it changes what the next administration is willing to get away with.
LASU Conscience will keep asking the questions this Union owes its students answers to.
Akojede Oluwadamilola, Deputy Editor-In-Chief, LASU Conscience
