The Dean of Student Affairs at the University of Ghana, Professor Rosina Kyeremanten, has denied allegations from the UG SRC Electoral Commission of bias toward certain candidates in the ongoing 2024 SRC election.

According to a document dated August 2, 2024, Electoral Commissioner Mudasir-Ibn Ibrahim claimed that the vetting process was rescheduled to favour specific aspirants and that his suggestions were ignored, leading to the vetting taking place on August 3, 2024, without his approval.

In a recent interview on Campus Exclusive, Professor Kyeremanten categorically denied these accusations, claiming that she holds no partiality towards any candidate.

She stated the transparency of the vetting process and expressed surprise at the allegations given her previously amicable relationship with the EC.

“These accusations are entirely unfounded. The Electoral Commissioner, my office, including the Vice Dean, and I have all worked transparently throughout this election process.

"I was genuinely surprised to see this letter because we have always maintained a cordial working relationship with the Electoral Commissioner. The allegations against me are baseless,” Professor Kyeremanten stated.

She further clarified the reasons behind the change in the vetting date. Some panellists were unavailable on the initially scheduled date of August 2, and an alternative date of August 11 proposed by the Legon Police was unsuitable due to the university's examination schedule.

As a result, those present on August 2, including the vetting panellists, aspirants, and the Dean, agreed to move the vetting to August 3.

“Before the events on Saturday and Sunday, the EC had set a vetting date for the aspirants. Due to past incidents, we sought additional security from the University Legon police.

"They suggested August 11, but that would conflict with our exam schedule, so we didn't want to inconvenience the aspirants.

"The Vice Dean, EC, and I met and agreed to hold the vetting before exams started. A letter was issued to confirm this decision,” she explained.

She added, “The EC had earlier proposed that senior members be involved to ensure transparency, which we agreed to.

"The Vice Dean invited a Political Science lecturer to participate. Despite the EC being present, only three panellists showed up on August 2.

"We waited until 2 pm, and when we contacted the absent panellists, they provided excuses. They should have informed the EC earlier if they knew they wouldn’t be available.”

“In the presence of the EC, we reached a consensus to conduct the vetting the next day (Saturday),” she continued.

Professor Kyeremanten also pointed out that while the Electoral Commissioner was part of the consensus, he showed little interest in the decision-making process and eventually walked out of the meeting.

“Senior members were there as observers to facilitate the process. While discussing with the EC, he walked out. My office staff, the Vice Dean, and most aspirants were present. Only one or two aspirants were absent, but the majority were there. That’s what happened,” she recounted.

She concluded by stressing that the Office of the Dean has no intention of interfering with the SRC electoral process.