President Bola Tinubu’s decision to rename the University of Maiduguri as “Muhammadu Buhari University” has sparked sharp criticism from scholars and commentators, who argue that the move lacks intellectual merit, cultural relevance, and historical fairness.
In a strongly worded critique, political analyst and academic, Dr. Umar Arɗo, questioned the rationale behind honouring the late former President Muhammadu Buhari- described as a soldier and politician with minimal ties to academia – by naming a university after him.
“Buhari was neither an educationist nor an intellectual”, Arɗo wrote, insisting that such institutions should be named after individuals who embody academic excellence, educational reform, or significant intellectual contribution.
He further pointed out that Buhari neither founded, taught at, nor had any known connection to the University of Maiduguri, located in Borno State – far from Buhari’s home state of Katsina. “There are many local icons in the Northeast more deserving of such recognition,” Ardo added.
Ardo also faulted the exclusion of late General Murtala Muhammed, who established the University of Maiduguri and 6 other federal universities in 1975, from such honours. “If any leader deserves to have one of these institutions named after him, it is Murtala”, he argued.
Suggesting more fitting alternatives, Arɗo proposed a military barracks, rural development institute, or public structure in Katsina as more appropriate ways to honour Buhari’s legacy.
He warned that politicising institutions of learning by attaching them to partisan or controversial figures risks undermining their core mission. “Universities should not serve as memorials to contested political legacies, but as beacons of truth, critical inquiry, and national ideals,” he concluded.
