The Politics and Poise of Leadership in Queen Elizabeth II Hall

 

By Osuolale Oluwatomilayo 

“Politics, when done right is not the pursuit of power but the stewardship of trust” — Unknown 

Power at play, or rather, politics within Queen Elizabeth II Hall has long been an emblem of the university’s larger democratic temperament, a microcosm where ideals of leadership, representation, and responsibility are constantly tested. It is in this small but significant arena that the spirit of governance meets the realities of service, and where leadership becomes more than a position, it becomes a duty.

Over the years, the hall has witnessed administrations that reflected both the promise and the pitfalls of student politics. Each tenure, with its peculiar mix of achievements and shortcomings, tells a story of growth, learning, and sometimes, relapse. Yet through it all, one constant remains: the commitment to make Queen Elizabeth II Hall not only a place of residence but a model of participatory governance within the University of Ibadan.

The political atmosphere in the hall is often vibrant, sometimes tense, but always instructive. It reveals much about the evolving relationship between leaders and the led, and about how power, when rightly managed, can build communities, but when misused, can shake the foundation that should be trust.

The Legacy of the Past Administration

The previous administration of Queen Elizabeth II Hall led by Agbonde Mojoyin left behind a mark that was both commendable and cautionary. Sustainability became a central theme of their governance, and despite limited resources, the administration maintained a relatively stable structure. Through consistent engagement with residents, visible infrastructural interventions, and an open approach to student participation, it succeeded in preserving a level of trust in hall governance.

There was a clarity of direction and a sense of purpose that, even in its flaws, demonstrated an understanding of what leadership should entail. The administration’s sustainability came not from grand gestures only but from a steady commitment to function, ensuring that essential duties were executed, and that the welfare of residents remained a visible priority.

Still, it would be dishonest to romanticize the past. Like many student-led structures, the administration grappled with the limits of its authority and the realities of bureaucracy. Certain projects were delayed, communication sometimes faltered, and execution did not always match intention. Yet, in the balance of its achievements and missteps, the administration provided a foundation upon which the present could build, a testament to continuity in leadership and the importance of institutional memory.

The Now 

The current administration entered office with a strong mandate and a wave of optimism. It was seen as a continuation of the progress made by its predecessors, a chance to consolidate gains, fix lingering issues, and raise the standard of governance. Indeed, the hall’s leadership structure reflected promise: a set of individuals with diverse capacities, each entrusted with specific portfolios vital to the welfare of the hall.

Yet, as is often the case, promise met with pressure. The absence of a Social Minister, a crucial office in the organizational and cultural life of the hall, has posed a notable challenge. Social events and community engagements, which typically serve as the heart of Queen Elizabeth II Hall’s spirit, have struggled to maintain their traditional vibrancy. This vacuum, unfortunately, stems from the controversy surrounding the candidate who initially ran for the position, a campaign tainted by allegations of bullying and intimidation.

That episode not only disrupted the rhythm of the electoral process but also raised difficult questions about integrity, accountability, and the kind of values that leadership should embody. While the administration deserves credit for navigating the aftermath with caution and composure, the situation revealed how fragile political balance can be when ethics are compromised.

Despite this setback, the current executives have demonstrated an admirable ability to adapt. Many of them have had to assume additional responsibilities beyond their designated roles, ensuring that governance continues despite structural limitations. Their management of key portfolios, from welfare to internal affairs, has reflected resilience and coordination. It must be acknowledged that leadership under such conditions demands a degree of flexibility that few appreciate from the outside.

However, this administration is not without its flaws. While some executives have risen to the occasion, others have fallen short of their promises. Certain projects that were loudly advertised during campaign periods and boldly etched into manifestos have either stalled or diminished in scope. Initiatives that should have defined this tenure have been reduced to token gestures, and in some cases, the bare minimum has been branded as the grandest achievement.

More concerning is the subtle tension that has occasionally defined the relationship between some executives and the hall press. The freedom of the press, scarcely spoken about, a cornerstone of transparency and accountability, must not only be tolerated but respected. Attempts, however subtle, to restrict or dismiss and bully journalistic scrutiny weaken the integrity of governance. The press, as a mirror of the hall’s political life, plays an essential role in ensuring that the public remains informed and leaders remain answerable. To stifle that space is to erode one of the last defences of accountability.

The Next Administration

As the next electoral season approaches, Queen Elizabeth II Hall once again finds itself at a defining crossroads. The expectation for better governance grows stronger, not only because of what has been achieved but because of what remains undone. The next administration will inherit both the progress and the problems of its predecessors, and it will be judged by how it chooses to address them.

There is, first, the need to restore complete political discipline. The early signs of disregard for electoral rules by some intending candidates are troubling. Leadership begins not at the point of inauguration but at the point of aspiration. When candidates undermine the very regulations that safeguard fair competition, they compromise the legitimacy of their mandate before it even begins. The Electoral Committee and hall authorities must therefore enforce decorum and ensure that the sanctity of the process is preserved.

Equally important is the need for renewed ethical consciousness. The next administration must remember that leadership is not performance; it is responsibility. The culture of over-publicizing minimal achievements must give way to genuine service. Residents do not seek spectacle; they seek sincerity. Manifestos should cease to be poetry of promises and become actionable roadmaps. Governance should not end with the distribution of souvenirs or the organization of events; it should begin with thoughtful policy and end with measurable impact.

Moreover, future leaders must learn from the administrative gaps of their predecessors. The importance of team cohesion, accountability, and inclusiveness cannot be overstated. Each officeholder must recognize that leadership is collective, and that the failure of one arm diminishes the credibility of the entire structure. The next Chairperson and executive team must prioritize communication, with residents, with the press, and with one another. Transparency, not silence, builds trust.

In reflecting on the hall’s recent political journey, it is only fair to commend both the past and current Chairpersons for their dedication. Their tenures, though different in tone and circumstance, were bound by a shared commitment to service. The challenges they faced were many, financial constraints, administrative and academic delays, and the complexity of managing diverse expectations, yet they steered the hall with patience and consistency. The foundations they have laid must not be allowed to crumble under indifference or disunity.

The task before the next administration is, therefore, not to reinvent the wheel, but to refine it. To build on the legacy of those before them while correcting the faults that remain. To redefine what success means in governance, not by the volume of announcements made, but by the depth of change achieved. To lead with courage, empathy, and discipline.

Till The Pen Bleeds Again

Politics in Queen Elizabeth II Hall, like all politics, is a surface, it shows not only the character of its leaders but also the conscience of its people. It is easy to criticize from afar, but much harder to sustain governance in the face of pressure, expectation, and scrutiny. The current administration has proven that leadership can adapt even in imperfection. The next must prove that leadership can excel.

If each administration learns from the last, if rules are respected and responsibilities embraced, Queen Elizabeth II Hall will continue to stand as more than just a residence, it will be a symbol of student governance done right. The past deserves our gratitude, the present our understanding, and the future our highest expectations.

The politics of Queen Elizabeth II Hall must now move beyond survival to sustainability, beyond hearsay to results, and beyond personality to principle. That is the path forward, and it is a path worth walking. When this is done, the pen will bleed in appreciation of a job well done.