When multiple parties lay claim to the same property, the law provides a mechanism known as an Interpleader. In simple terms, a tenant says:
“I acknowledge my obligation to pay the rent, but because there is a dispute over who is legally entitled to receive it, I will remain neutral until a competent court determines the rightful owner.”
This principle offers an important lesson for professionals navigating the current leadership dispute within the Institute of Safety Professionals of Nigeria (ISPON).
In my previous article,
Read here:
I described a situation where two people claim ownership of the same building and both demand rent from the tenant.
In such a situation, the tenant’s personal opinion about who is right or wrong is irrelevant. Paying the wrong party could lead to financial loss or other consequences.
Today, many professionals find themselves in a similar position as different factions continue to claim legitimacy within ISPON.
Let me state my position clearly. I believe the Engr. Timothy Iwuagwu-led faction has contributed significantly to the divisions within the profession despite interventions and efforts by stakeholders, including the House of Representatives Committee on Safety Standards and Regulations.
In my view, the collective interests of the profession should always take precedence over factional interests.
However, my personal opinion is separate from my professional views.
Professionals should not make compliance decisions based on emotions, friendships, loyalties, or personal preferences. We should be guided by due process, the law, and the subsisting court orders.
This is why I advocate what I call the Interpleader Mindset: neutrality until there is legal clarity.
Where authority remains disputed, professionals and organisations should exercise caution before paying annual dues, membership upgrades, registration fees, training fees, or any other financial obligations into accounts controlled by competing factions.
Neutrality is not rebellion. It is prudence.
Read the Court Orders, Not the Narratives
Every court ruling is often followed by competing press statements and declarations of victory. Professionals must rise above the noise and focus on the actual court orders.
Compliance should be guided by documented legal authority, not social media campaigns, press releases, or factional narratives.
The Bottom Line
Leadership disputes will eventually pass. Factions will come and go. What must remain protected is the integrity of the profession and the interests of its members.
Your professional reputation, compliance obligations, and legal standing should never become casualties of institutional conflict.
When a professional house is divided, caution is not weakness, it is wisdom.
Lets Keep our eyes on the facts, respect due process, and remain guided by lawful authority until there is certainty.
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and this article does not constitute legal advice. It represents my personal opinion and professional perspective on navigating institutional uncertainty. Readers are encouraged to seek independent legal advice where necessary.
What are your thoughts? Should professionals remain neutral during institutional disputes, or should they align with the faction they believe is right?
Leave a Reply