Controversy Deepens as Counter-Statement Challenges Tansian University’s Claims Against Rev. Daniel Igwilo
A fresh wave of controversy has emerged surrounding Tansian University following a strongly worded counter-statement disputing allegations made against Rev. Daniel Igwilo by the institution’s management.
The rebuttal describes the university’s earlier statement as “highly misleading and self-serving,” asserting that the claims of “gross misconduct” and “misappropriation” leveled against Rev. Igwilo lack credible evidence and due process. It emphasizes that allegations of such magnitude require transparent investigations and verifiable proof, rather than what it termed “media propaganda.”
The statement specifically accuses Prof. Eugene Nwadialor and Rev. Dr. Innocent Anthony Uke of attempting to discredit Rev. Igwilo, allegedly at the instance of Rev. Fr. Dr. Edwin Chukwujekwu Obiora. It characterizes the situation as indicative of a deeper internal struggle over control and legitimacy within the university.
Raising critical questions, the statement queries the absence of independent investigations, regulatory findings, or court rulings to substantiate the allegations. It further criticizes what it describes as a resort to public mudslinging by individuals who claim moral and spiritual authority, rather than adherence to established legal and institutional processes.
The rebuttal also alleges that certain individuals have “hijacked” the university’s administration, transforming it into personal property despite not being formal employees of the institution. These claims, it argues, underscore concerns about accountability and governance within the university leadership.
Defending Rev. Igwilo’s legacy, the statement insists that his contributions to the institution cannot be erased through administrative declarations driven by internal conflicts.
Consequently, it calls on relevant authorities to initiate an independent and transparent investigation into the matter, urging the public to view the university’s position as one side of a disputed issue rather than a conclusive account.
As tensions continue to mount, observers note that the unfolding situation highlights broader concerns about governance, transparency, and conflict resolution within private academic institutions.
