The Man ISPON Loves to Hate...(Part 2)

Read 1st part incase you missed it👇🏾

Timothy Iwuagwu: The Man ISPON Loves to Hate – But Is the Udezi Alternative Any Better? By Femi Da-Silva

There is another uncomfortable subject both camps must confront: ego.

At what point does fighting for an institution become fighting to possess it?

At what point does defending legitimacy become defending a title?

At what point does leadership become control?

And at what point should a leader who genuinely loves an institution recognise that his continued insistence on occupying the driver’s seat may itself be preventing reconciliation?

These questions apply to Iwuagwu.

But they apply equally to the Udezi-led structure if it wants to present itself as the more democratic and institutionally responsible alternative.

You cannot defeat authoritarianism by becoming more authoritarian.

You cannot criticise one man’s command-and-control style while building a structure that members perceive as even more closed.

You cannot demand that Iwuagwu submit himself to institutional authority while refusing to expose your own authority to the fullest possible scrutiny.

And you cannot build professional unity by expecting everyone who questions you simply to fall in line.

That is not reconciliation, that is control.

Udezi’s Camp Must Open Itself Up

This is not an accusation that every person within the Udezi structure is acting improperly.

There are respected professionals on both sides of this crisis.

But respectable individuals can still participate in unhealthy governance structures.

The Udezi-led group therefore has an opportunity to prove its critics wrong.

Open the institution.
Publish the governance processes.
Engage members directly.
Explain major decisions.
Make financial accountability visible – Very Important.
Allow difficult questions.
Let branches account transparently.
Welcome dissent.
Stop treating disagreement as evidence of disloyalty.
And most importantly, submit the leadership itself to the same independent process it expects everybody else to respect.

If the Udezi-led faction genuinely represents the better future for ISPON, it should have nothing to fear from radical transparency.

Because ultimately, the test of democratic leadership is not how comfortably it works with supporters.

It is how it treats people who disagree with it.

Look at What ISPON Has Become.

The contradiction is almost impossible to ignore. One structure recognises one President, and another recognises another.

One side dismisses people whom the other side regards as legitimate officeholders.

Each claims legitimacy, produces documents, has supporters, communicates with members, interprets legal developments in support of its position. and the ordinary Nigerian safety professional is somehow expected to determine which ISPON is ISPON.

This is no longer normal institutional disagreement.

It is dysfunction.

And while the leaders fight, the ISPON brand suffers.

What About the Branches?

Then there is another subject people are often reluctant to discuss:

the branches.

What exactly has ISPON become at branch level?

Are some branches gradually becoming personal territories?

Who controls branch revenue?

Who approves expenditure?

Who receives training income?

Who controls membership records?

Where are their audited accounts?

Can ordinary members demand financial information? Of course no.

And can they ask these questions without being labelled troublesome?

These questions must apply to every branch and every faction.

If a state branch of a national statutory professional body begins behaving like the personal property of a few individuals, that is no longer merely an administrative weakness.

It is a governance failure.

ISPON cannot regulate the safety profession nationally while its own internal governance remains opaque.

ISPON should undertake an independent competency and governance review of its senior administrative offices, beginning with the Registrar.

And the same standard should apply to the Governing Board.

Are the people administering ISPON there because they possess the independence and courage necessary to protect a statutory professional institution?

Or have positions and titles become rewards that make people unwilling to question leadership?

That is a question not an accusation.

But it is a question ISPON members have every right to demand an answer to.

A title should never purchase silence.

Professional honours should never prevent independent reasoning.

Anyone occupying a statutory professional office must be prepared to tell the President no when the institution requires it.

Otherwise, what exactly is the purpose of the office?

Perhaps They Should All Resign

There comes a point when reconciliation requires more than another meeting between the same personalities.

Perhaps ISPON has reached that point.

Institutional confidence cannot be restored by the same people under whose watch it collapsed.

Reset the institution.

And let ISPON start again.

And Until Then, Follow the Money

Here is where ordinary ISPON members have enormous power.

Money.
Membership dues.
Renewals.
Training fees.
Induction fees.
Conference payments.
Branch levies.
Certification charges.
Sponsorship.
Corporate patronage.

Where does this money go?

Who controls it?

Which structure is entitled to collect it?

How much has each structure collected?

Where are the audited accounts?

What assets belong to ISPON?

Who presently controls those assets?

These are not insulting questions.

They are elementary governance questions.

Until ISPON’s leadership and financial authority are placed beyond reasonable dispute, members should seriously consider withholding non-essential dues, discretionary levies and patronage of faction-controlled commercial activities.

Not to kill ISPON, but to save ISPON.

Members should not blindly finance institutional warfare.

The collective contributions of safety professionals should not become the financial oxygen sustaining a battle for individual control.

Corporate organisations should equally conduct enhanced due diligence before sponsorship, training, accreditation or other discretionary financial transactions conducted in ISPON’s name while competing authority claims persist.

Every naira collected in the name of a statutory professional institution should be accountable to its members.

Freeze, Audit, Verify, Reconcile, Elect.

ISPON needs an institutional reset.

A message for Timothy Iwuagwu:

ISPON is not an inheritance.

You may have ideas and believe you are defending ISPON.

But good intentions do not automatically produce good institutions.

At some point, every leader must answer a simple question:

If my continued presence is preventing the institution I claim to love from healing, am I prepared to step aside?

That question is before Iwuagwu.

And ultimately, it is before every ISPON member.

Stop Choosing Factions, instead choose ISPON.