After going through the content of the letter demanding an apology for what the lawyers described as untrue, false and baseless publication, the first question that came to mind was: Did the lawyers actually do mock trial with their client when they received the complaint from him? How could Patrick Ndulu turn around to deny or challenge something he actually said on video and audio record to certified and credible journalists who actually sought his permission for the interview that was later published?
Well, let me use this forum as an opportunity to inform the lawyers that their client actually CONFESSED on camera to facts questioning the credibility of the exams being conducted by WAEC, and that they should only expect an apology from some other journalists or media institutions and not from Fonti or AYV; at least not on this instance.
But even under normal circumstance, the lawyers were expected to advise their client not to challenge assertions that the WAEC exams were no longer credible because that is just the sad reality in modern day Sierra Leone. However, and to be fair enough, Ndulu should not be exclusively blamed for this as he merely inherited a rotten system that has been there at least since 1972. He could only be guilty for failing to take steps to end the examination malpractice syndrome in his tenure which is killing the essence of education in the country.
The lawyers said in their letter that Ndulu communicated to them that the assertions in the article titled: WAEC exams are no longer credible, were “completely untrue, false, baseless and was clearly fuelled by grudge and malice calculated to embarrass the Acting Head of National Office, those in conduct of their examinations nationwide including principals, supervisors and examiners”.
Well, the response to this is simple. The only grudge I could possibly have for Ndulu is the fact that he seems comfortable with the fact that his office is thriving on the culture of impunity to punish innocent children. I stand to be corrected. ‘Ndulu me en you don ever meet up any sie?’
Again, if anybody is guilty of a conduct that has the tendency to damage the reputation of WAEC, principals, supervisors and examiners, that person is definitely not Fonti or AYV, but Ndulu himself, because it was him that announced to the public through the journalists that WAEC is contracting principals, examiners and supervisors with ‘QUESTIONABLE INTEGERITY’ to conduct exams.
Also note that it is the action of WAEC to withhold results without tangible evidence of exams malpractice to the public that is subjecting the institution to public hatred and not the AYV publication.
It is pathetic that lawyers who were never present where their client was being interviewed by journalists could write with authority that the content of the article in question was ‘a complete fabrication without a single element of truth’.
Can you please head straight to the courtroom and stop insulting me and my institution in an ill-advised letter if you are sure that the matters mentioned in our article never ‘happened as alleged or at all?’
I could not even comprehend why lawyers could describe my call for the resignation of the WAEC boss as contemptuous. Is he above the law to the extent that his actions should not be checked and asked to quit office when he fails in his duty?
While we await the summon that will only end up embarrass your client the more, let me advise that next time you ask your clients fundamental questions before sending palaver letter to journalists and other people.
“Adiós por ahora”…in Spanish meaning “Goodbye for now”