Uncle Longman English, how about you find out how HJ posting works before you start going all Shakespeare on something you know nothing about?
Reading through this, the institutional rejection of the list is not out of place. However, I sympathise with the young men and women that had to pass through this harrowing experience. Their suffering and hardship doesn't legitimize a suspected faulty recruitment.
I am sure when they get a response from the recruiting agency, things will be clearer.
For FG institutions, the principle of Fed Character prevails. The host state is given an appreciable number, then the rest of the approved slots is spread over the remaining states as equally/balanced as possible. This will also be balanced against the existing staff or interns on ground to ensure overall balance from each state, and region.
Secondly, the Federal Character Commission must be present and represented in such exercises.
After the process is completed, before the successful candidates are given letters of offer, the final list is forwarded again to the Federal Character Commission to ascertain adherence and compliance.
While we are not privy to what was done and why, on face value... the origin of the list should be investigated.
If you ask me, in a recruitment exercise of 50 staff, it can never be right for a tribe to have 17 of 50, even the host State is unlikely to have 17 or the 50. Think about 36 states and distribute 50 among them.
I am interested, when we said we have sent the complaint, who did we send to or against?
That institution is the victim here and social media gaslighting cannot cow them into our blackmail .