Suspension Without Fair Hearing: Political Motivation, Bullying and Frustration in Pursuit of Power

– My Opinion, by Bello Omotunde

In any credible association or organization, the principles of justice, fairness, and due process form the bedrock of its operation. When these principles are compromised—particularly in the form of suspensions or disciplinary actions—the credibility of the association begins to crumble. This is precisely the concern arising from a recent suspension that appears to lack transparency, fairness, and proper procedure, all while being tainted with the stench of political motivation, personal vendettas, and a desperate bid to assert control.

One of the most disturbing aspects of the suspension in question is the clear disregard for the fundamental right to a fair hearing. In democratic and rule-based environments, no individual should be punished or penalized without first being informed of the allegations against them, and subsequently given a chance to respond. This cornerstone of justice was blatantly ignored.

Instead, the decision appears to have been made behind closed doors, without proper engagement, and without affording the affected party the opportunity to present their side. Such conduct not only undermines the integrity of the process but also exposes the association to reputational damage and internal instability.

What makes this situation even more troubling is the clear indication that the suspension is politically motivated. Rather than being based on objective evidence or misconduct, the action seems rooted in a struggle for influence and control within the association. When disciplinary tools are used as weapons in political battles, they lose their legitimacy and instead become instruments of oppression and manipulation.

This tactic—masking personal frustrations and insecurities behind procedural decisions—is not new, but it is dangerous. It threatens to erode trust within the organization and polarize its members, ultimately weakening the unity and shared purpose that associations are meant to foster.

The Bully Tactics and Frustration at Play

There is a noticeable undertone of bullying and frustration in how the suspension was handled. Rather than engaging in open dialogue or addressing grievances through established processes, those in power appear to have resorted to strong-arm tactics, attempting to silence dissenting voices or perceived threats. This is not leadership—it is intimidation.

Frustration may stem from a failure to control narratives, disagreements over direction, or resistance to unchecked authority. However, weaponizing that frustration against individuals through unjust suspensions reveals not just a lack of leadership maturity, but also a troubling intolerance for dissent or difference of opinion.

At the heart of this controversy lies a more sobering reality: the association is gradually losing its standing, relevance, and integrity. When decisions are clouded by personal interests, and procedures are bypassed in favour of expediency, the association ceases to function as a credible institution. It becomes a playground for power-hungry actors who prioritize self-preservation over collective progress.

Members, observers, and stakeholders will eventually lose faith. And once credibility is lost, rebuilding it is a tall order. To restore its status, the association must recommit itself to principles of transparency, fairness, and inclusive governance.

Suspensions or disciplinary actions, if necessary, must always be guided by due process and rooted in fairness. The case at hand, however, appears to be a misappropriation of power—steeped in political gamesmanship, bullying tactics, and frustration over lost control.

For the association to reclaim its purpose and prestige, it must acknowledge the flaws in its processes, ensure accountability, and prioritize justice over politics. Only then can it hope to rise above internal divisions and regain the confidence of its members and the public.