A press statement issued by the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology (KNUST) on the development of its new statutes has drawn criticism from sections of the University community, with staff disputing aspects of the University’s account of the process and calling for greater transparency and stakeholder engagement.In a statement released by Management, the University said the Governing Council constituted a committee in March 2026, following the coming into force of the KNUST Act, 2025 (Act 1157), to prepare draft statutes for implementing the legislation.According to the statement, the committee engaged colleges, academic and administrative units, staff unions, student bodies and other stakeholders between April and July 2026 before presenting a draft to an emergency meeting of the Academic Board on Aug. 5, 2026.Management said the Academic Board subsequently established a review committee to consider comments and proposals received from stakeholders. It added that the review committee is yet to submit its report before the draft statutes are considered by the Academic Board and later the Governing Council for possible approval.However, some staff members have challenged several aspects of the statement, arguing that it omits key events surrounding both the passage of the KNUST Act and the ongoing statutes review.According to a Professor, the committee responsible for reviewing the University’s governance framework was constituted by the Academic Board in March 2025, not March 2026 as stated in the University’s release. They said the committee, chaired by Professor Bugiri, was mandated to review both the proposed Act and the accompanying statutes before making recommendations for consideration.The staff also disputed Management’s assertion that extensive consultations preceded the passage of the KNUST Act, 2025.“There is no record of broad stakeholder consultations before the Act was passed,” one staff member said. “Many members of the University community, including staff unions, only became aware of the legislation after it had already been passed by Parliament.”According to the staff, the Act was not widely circulated for discussion before its passage, leading to concerns that key governance reforms were introduced without adequate participation from affected stakeholders.They argued that because the statutes derive their legal authority from the Act, concerns surrounding the legislative process have inevitably extended to the drafting of the statutes.“The Act gives life to the statutes,” another staff member said. “If stakeholders were not sufficiently engaged in developing the Act, then similar concerns naturally arise regarding the statutes.”A major concern raised by staff relates to the period initially allocated for reviewing the draft statutes.According to a deputy registrar, the University community was first given only one week to review a document that had taken the committee more than 15 months to prepare. They described the timeframe as insufficient for meaningful scrutiny and consultation.The initial deadline prompted objections from staff unions and other stakeholders, who argued that members needed adequate time to study the document and make informed submissions.Following the concerns raised, the University extended the consultation period to eight weeks, allowing additional time for comments and recommendations.Some staff members also questioned Management’s assertion that extensive stakeholder engagement had taken place before the draft statutes were circulated.They said many individuals submitted written memoranda but had yet to receive acknowledgements or feedback.“Consultation is not only about receiving written submissions,” one senior lecturer said. “It also requires engagement with stakeholders on the issues they have raised.”The staff compared the process with Ghana’s constitutional review exercise, which involved extensive public engagements across the country, arguing that KNUST could have adopted a similarly participatory approach.Some also expressed concern over reports that a recent “Mindset Transformation Workshop” for selected University officials could be perceived as an attempt to build support for the draft statutes while concerns raised by stakeholders remain unresolved.Those claims I could not independently verify.Others warned that if concerns over transparency and consultation are not adequately addressed, mistrust within the University community could deepen.Management, however, has maintained that the review remains open, inclusive and consultative.The University said the draft statutes have not yet been approved and reaffirmed its commitment to engaging all relevant stakeholders before any final consideration by the Academic Board and the Governing Council.