LAST month, on 24 February, we sought comments from Professor Derrick Armstrong on the highly contentious e-mail and documents that he had sent on 16 November 2018 to the incoming Vice-Chancellor Professor Pal Ahluwalia on Associate Professor Angeela Jokhan.
"I share this information in confidence but I would expect that as incoming VC you would be entitled to see this material".
We have not heard from Armstrong. Surprisingly, he joined the howling pack to condemn Professor Ahluwalia (resulting in Ahluwalia's inhumane deportation from Fiji) when it is quite clear that the BDO Report on Jokhan was prompted by Armstrong's strong objection to her re-appointment as Faculty of Science, Technology and Environment (FSTE) Dean at USP in 2018. Egged on by the Fiji Sun, Winston Thompson has launched several investigations against Ahluwalia. On 22 January 2015, Jokhan was issued a three-year contract (17 April 2015 to 16 April 2018) for the role of Dean of FSTE with annual total remuneration of $231,662. On 29 August 2018, a SMT contract review panel gathered to review Jokhan but the Committee excluded Ahluwalia. The panel awarded Jokhan a one-step increment, three cash bonuses, and a five-year contract (1 November 2018 to 1 October 2023) which was signed on 19 September 2018 by Rajesh Chandra. BDO further noted that following the expiry of the above contract there was a period where they found no evidence of a renewal or contract that Jokhan was employed under. Then on 17 July 2018 Jokhan was awarded a two month contract from 1 November 2018 to 31 December 2018, carrying a salary of $294,514, signed by Chandra. (Jokhan Contract November to December 2018). BDO was unable to obtain evidence of any review meeting prior to this contract being awarded, if this was the case “it would appear as being a breach of policy of VCP Ordinance section 50 which states that SMT remuneration is to be covered by the remuneration committee”.
We wonder if Jokhan will be asked to resign as Permanent Secretary of Education. She is also on the USP and the Fiji National University Councils
DERRICK ARMSTRONG to PAL AHLUWALIA, 16 November 2018,
Re: ANGEELA JOKHAN and why Armstrong strongly objected to the renewal of her Dean's CONTRACT at USP. This was her contract renewal 2018 a few weeks before Pal took over as Vice-Chancellor.
"A little while ago you asked me about the process by which Anjeela’s contract as dean of FSTE was extended by 5 years. I’ve attached the written report that I submitted for the review together with her QoR reports and a Scopus report. You will see that she has a h-index of 3 and a career citation total of 58. The small number of recent publications she has contributed to are outside her discipline area and co-written with other staff and students. There is a very big gap in her publication record between these recent publications and the two or three publications that look like they came out of her PhD. I made the points contained in the written report even more vigorously in the meeting itself but the committee came to a different view on her suitability for reappointment. I share this information in confidence but I would expect that as incoming VC you would be entitled to see this material."
Derrick Armstrong on Angeela Jokhan
"Her enthusiasm can from time to time lead to her being quite abrasive and dismissive of other points of view. She can be a very effective member of the SMT team but this is not always the case and she has an unfortunate tendency to create conflict with her peers and to be extremely disrespectful. She does have a tendency to insist that she is correct on an issue on the basis of her personal knowledge and long experience with the University, even when there is no evidence to support her viewpoint."
"There have been many conflicts with Heads of Schools and with other staff. On occasions the Dean has taken actions with regard to staff members that have put the University at risk. She demonstrates considerable impatience with those with whom she differs. It would be hard not to be aware of the widespread grumblings and dissatisfaction within the Faculty over her management style."
"Associate Professor Jokhan does not have the rank of full professor and her personal research leadership is minimal. She is a biologist by academic background but in recent times has contributed to publications with her students and junior staff in the area of ICT enabled learning. However, she does not have an academic background in this area, nor does she have a strong profile. The absence of academic leadership is a significant deficit in the leadership one might expect from a dean. Her contribution is principally as a manager rather than as an academic leader.
Feedback on the Performance of Associate Professor Anjeela Jokhan as Dean FSTE by DERRICK ARMSTRONG to USP Committee headed by RAJESH Chandra
Associate Professor Jokhan is a highly experienced manager and makes significant contributions to the University across a number of areas. In addition to her Faculty responsibilities she has also recently taken over temporary responsibility at the SMT level for the University’s ICT area.She pursues her responsibilities with vigour and has been fully engaged in a number of key areas and activities central to the University’s strategy and performance. She is a very active member of the University Senate. Her enthusiasm can from time to time lead to her being quite abrasive and dismissive of other points of view. She can be a very effective member of the SMT team but this is not always the case and she has an unfortunate tendency to create conflict with her peers and to be extremely disrespectful. She does have a tendency to insist that she is correct on an issue on the basis of her personal knowledge and long experience with the University, even when there is no evidence to support her viewpoint.
Associate Professor Jokhan runs her Faculty with a very firm hand. The Faculty is successful on a number of indicators and she has put together a good team of Associate Deans who ensure efficiency and consistency in the administration of Faculty procedures. The Faculty has led the University in a number of areas, for example in the development of apps and the granting of patents. The Faculty has also been very successful in achieving the international accreditation / recognition of programmes in, for example, Engineering and Computing. The research performance of the Faculty might be considered satisfactory overall but there has been very little success in achieving external funding for research and with some individual exceptions its performance would not be considered notable compared with Science Faculties elsewhere. With stronger academic leadership there would most certainly be opportunities for the Faculty to step up a gear. There have been many conflicts with Heads of Schools and with other staff. On occasions the Dean has taken actions with regard to staff members that have put the University at risk. She demonstrates considerable impatience with those with whom she differs. It would be hard not to be aware of the widespread grumblings and dissatisfaction within the Faculty over her management style.
Associate Professor Jokhan does not have the rank of full professor and her personal research leadership is minimal. She is a biologist by academic background but in recent times has contributed to publications with her students and junior staff in the area of ICT enabled learning. However, she does not have an academic background in this area, nor does she have a strong profile. The absence of academic leadership is a significant deficit in the leadership one might expect from a dean. Her contribution is principally as a manager rather than as an academic leader.
- Contribution made to support the University, the Vice-Chancellor and President and the Senior Management Team.
Associate Professor Jokhan is a highly experienced manager and makes significant contributions to the University across a number of areas. In addition to her Faculty responsibilities she has also recently taken over temporary responsibility at the SMT level for the University’s ICT area.She pursues her responsibilities with vigour and has been fully engaged in a number of key areas and activities central to the University’s strategy and performance. She is a very active member of the University Senate. Her enthusiasm can from time to time lead to her being quite abrasive and dismissive of other points of view. She can be a very effective member of the SMT team but this is not always the case and she has an unfortunate tendency to create conflict with her peers and to be extremely disrespectful. She does have a tendency to insist that she is correct on an issue on the basis of her personal knowledge and long experience with the University, even when there is no evidence to support her viewpoint.
- Contribution to the Faculty/Department.
Associate Professor Jokhan runs her Faculty with a very firm hand. The Faculty is successful on a number of indicators and she has put together a good team of Associate Deans who ensure efficiency and consistency in the administration of Faculty procedures. The Faculty has led the University in a number of areas, for example in the development of apps and the granting of patents. The Faculty has also been very successful in achieving the international accreditation / recognition of programmes in, for example, Engineering and Computing. The research performance of the Faculty might be considered satisfactory overall but there has been very little success in achieving external funding for research and with some individual exceptions its performance would not be considered notable compared with Science Faculties elsewhere. With stronger academic leadership there would most certainly be opportunities for the Faculty to step up a gear. There have been many conflicts with Heads of Schools and with other staff. On occasions the Dean has taken actions with regard to staff members that have put the University at risk. She demonstrates considerable impatience with those with whom she differs. It would be hard not to be aware of the widespread grumblings and dissatisfaction within the Faculty over her management style.
- Leadership, Representation
Associate Professor Jokhan does not have the rank of full professor and her personal research leadership is minimal. She is a biologist by academic background but in recent times has contributed to publications with her students and junior staff in the area of ICT enabled learning. However, she does not have an academic background in this area, nor does she have a strong profile. The absence of academic leadership is a significant deficit in the leadership one might expect from a dean. Her contribution is principally as a manager rather than as an academic leader.
BDO REPORT FINDINGS ON ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR Anjela JOKHAN
FAST FORWARD TO BDO REPORT 2020 on ANJEELA JOKHAN
The objectives of the BDO investigation were to independently determine the existence of possible breaches as reported in the Paper - “Issues, Concerns, and Breaches of Past Management and Financial Decisions” written by the new VCP, Professor Pal Ahluwalia in early 2019. The New Zealand based accounting firm, BDO investigated and unequivocally confirmed a number of breaches of the university processes and procedures by the individuals concerned, and by the then Vice Chancellor and President (VCP) Professor Rajesh Chandra. We have liberally extracted excerpts from the independent BDO report that very clearly show that in the case of Anjeela Jokhan and three other cases there was clear violation of university rules, unethical conduct, and gross financial mismanagement by the previous administration including elements of the Senior Management Team.
Associate Professor Anjeela Jokhan
BDO report on the ‘Dean of Faculty of Science, Technology and Environment
On 22 January 2015 Associate Professor Jokhan was issued a three year contract (17 April 2015 to 16 April 2018) for the role of Dean of FSTE with annual total remuneration of $231,662 per AJ1 (Jokhan contract renewal January 2015).
On 29 August 2018 a SMT contract review panel gathered to review Associate Professor Jokhan, this committee excluded Professor Ahluwalia The panel awarded Associate Professor Jokhan a one-step increment, three cash bonuses and a five year contract (1 November 2018 to 1 October 2023) which was signed on 19 September 2018 per (AJ2), this was signed by Professor Chandra (Contract renewal September 2018).
BDO further noted that ‘Following the expiry of the above contract there was a period where we are have no evidence of a renewal or contract that Associate Professor Jokhan was employed under. Then on 17 July 2018 Associate Professor Jokhan was awarded a two month contract from 1 November 2018 to 31 December 2018 carrying a salary of $294,514,
signed by VCP Rajesh Chandra (Jokhan Contract November to December 2018). We were unable to obtain evidence of any review meeting prior to this contract being awarded, if this is the case it would appear as being a breach of policy of VCP Ordinance section 50 which states that SMT remuneration is to be covered by the remuneration committee.’
BDO observed that there was no formal remuneration committee:
‘Therefore, we note the five-year contract renewal which is required for standard USP policy to be considered by a remuneration committee was in the form of a review panel. The matter highlights the lack of a formal remuneration committee as the review panel was just made up of members of SMT and the PC. We do note the interim contract issued prior to the "remuneration committee review" appears to fall outside of USP procedures and policies. The issues with HR that have been disclosed throughout our work also shows HR as being inattentive in regards to the renewal of the contracts of SMT.’
BDO confirmed that there was no consultancy with VCD:
‘Furthermore, from the above there is no evidence to suggest Professor Chandra obtained Professor Ahluwalia’s approval to renew contracts, and we note that the five year length of the contract is potentially restrictive in regards to Professor Ahluwalia being able to reshape his team as he intends throughout his tenure.’
EIGHT YEARS BEFORE ARMSTRONG'S REPORT ANOTHER REPORT HAD DECLARED
The objectives of the BDO investigation were to independently determine the existence of possible breaches as reported in the Paper - “Issues, Concerns, and Breaches of Past Management and Financial Decisions” written by the new VCP, Professor Pal Ahluwalia in early 2019. The New Zealand based accounting firm, BDO investigated and unequivocally confirmed a number of breaches of the university processes and procedures by the individuals concerned, and by the then Vice Chancellor and President (VCP) Professor Rajesh Chandra. We have liberally extracted excerpts from the independent BDO report that very clearly show that in the case of Anjeela Jokhan and three other cases there was clear violation of university rules, unethical conduct, and gross financial mismanagement by the previous administration including elements of the Senior Management Team.
Associate Professor Anjeela Jokhan
BDO report on the ‘Dean of Faculty of Science, Technology and Environment
On 22 January 2015 Associate Professor Jokhan was issued a three year contract (17 April 2015 to 16 April 2018) for the role of Dean of FSTE with annual total remuneration of $231,662 per AJ1 (Jokhan contract renewal January 2015).
On 29 August 2018 a SMT contract review panel gathered to review Associate Professor Jokhan, this committee excluded Professor Ahluwalia The panel awarded Associate Professor Jokhan a one-step increment, three cash bonuses and a five year contract (1 November 2018 to 1 October 2023) which was signed on 19 September 2018 per (AJ2), this was signed by Professor Chandra (Contract renewal September 2018).
BDO further noted that ‘Following the expiry of the above contract there was a period where we are have no evidence of a renewal or contract that Associate Professor Jokhan was employed under. Then on 17 July 2018 Associate Professor Jokhan was awarded a two month contract from 1 November 2018 to 31 December 2018 carrying a salary of $294,514,
signed by VCP Rajesh Chandra (Jokhan Contract November to December 2018). We were unable to obtain evidence of any review meeting prior to this contract being awarded, if this is the case it would appear as being a breach of policy of VCP Ordinance section 50 which states that SMT remuneration is to be covered by the remuneration committee.’
BDO observed that there was no formal remuneration committee:
‘Therefore, we note the five-year contract renewal which is required for standard USP policy to be considered by a remuneration committee was in the form of a review panel. The matter highlights the lack of a formal remuneration committee as the review panel was just made up of members of SMT and the PC. We do note the interim contract issued prior to the "remuneration committee review" appears to fall outside of USP procedures and policies. The issues with HR that have been disclosed throughout our work also shows HR as being inattentive in regards to the renewal of the contracts of SMT.’
BDO confirmed that there was no consultancy with VCD:
‘Furthermore, from the above there is no evidence to suggest Professor Chandra obtained Professor Ahluwalia’s approval to renew contracts, and we note that the five year length of the contract is potentially restrictive in regards to Professor Ahluwalia being able to reshape his team as he intends throughout his tenure.’
EIGHT YEARS BEFORE ARMSTRONG'S REPORT ANOTHER REPORT HAD DECLARED
