Recently, Professor Ishaq Oloyede, the Registrar of the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB), appeared before the National Assembly to defend the agency’s budget. The session, particularly comments from Senator Adams Oshiomhole, revealed significant concerns regarding JAMB’s 2024 expenditures. Allegations included misuse of power, financial mismanagement, regulatory breaches, extravagant spending, and lavish treatment of staff, all allegedly at the expense of financially disadvantaged Nigerians.

One major point of contention is the perceived duplication of funding sources. Although the federal government allocates funds to support JAMB, the agency also generates revenue by imposing high fees on candidates and their families. Many nations classify education as an essential public service due to its role in societal development and human advancement. It remains baffling how JAMB, a knowledge-facilitating agency, has evolved into a federal revenue generator. Let us examine further details of the accusations against JAMB and Professor Oloyede, as reported in the media.

JAMB disclosed that it spent ₦1.1 billion on food and refreshments and ₦850 million on security, cleaning, and fumigation in 2024. Professor Oloyede revealed these figures during the defense of the agency’s 2025 budget proposal before the National Assembly Joint Committee on Finance, also noting that ₦4 billion was remitted to the Consolidated Revenue Fund, while JAMB received ₦6 billion in government grants.

This sparked criticism from the committee. Abiodun Faleke, Chairman of the House Finance Committee, questioned why a revenue-generating agency would still receive government funding, suggesting JAMB should retain its revenue instead. Similarly, Senator Oshiomhole expressed outrage over the spending, particularly on meals, implying it was at the cost of poor, vulnerable students. He also condemned the ₦850 million for fumigation and ₦600 million for local travel expenses, demanding justifications for these allocations.

Despite a subsequent statement from the Joint Committee exonerating the JAMB Registrar, public dissatisfaction over these revelations persists. From my perspective, the necessity of a centralized admissions body for all higher institutions in a federation is questionable. It contradicts the principles of federalism for state and privately funded institutions to depend on a federal agency like JAMB for admissions approval. Establishing uniform guidelines for admissions is reasonable, but imposing bureaucratic control undermines institutional autonomy.

Each year, many parents and students face immense hardship due to JAMB’s centralized processes, with some candidates waiting over five years for admission. The JAMB Act, enacted on December 7, 1989, mandates JAMB to oversee admissions and matriculation examinations for all universities, polytechnics, and colleges of education in Nigeria. Under Section 5(1) of the Act, JAMB is tasked with collaborating with tertiary institutions to place qualified candidates based on available spaces, institutional guidelines, and candidate preferences.

This section effectively grants JAMB control over candidates’ futures, contributing to the brain drain as many youths seek opportunities abroad. Moreover, the Act's phrasing extends JAMB’s reach to all tertiary institutions, regardless of ownership or funding source. This approach contradicts the 1999 Constitution, which places education on the Concurrent Legislative List, allowing both federal and state governments to legislate on educational matters. Yet, JAMB has become the sole admissions regulator.

Section 10 of the JAMB Act stipulates that the agency’s funding should primarily come from federal government subventions, with additional income derived from executing its duties. However, reports suggest that JAMB has deviated from this mandate, turning into a revenue-generating institution for the government. The National Assembly was justified in calling for JAMB to return to its original purpose. The Act does not authorize JAMB to prioritize revenue collection but rather to coordinate admissions, ideally without burdening candidates with excessive fees.

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines "maintain" as preserving something in its current state. If JAMB accumulates excess funds after fulfilling its responsibilities, it should consider waiving examination fees temporarily instead of accumulating surplus revenue. Transforming a service-oriented institution into a profit-making entity that exploits disadvantaged students and parents is fundamentally unjust.

As a member of the United Nations (UN), Nigeria is bound by UNESCO’s mission to promote education for all under Sustainable Development Goal 4. The UN recommends that member states allocate at least 26% of their annual budgets to education, emphasizing that education is a human right. This principle is reflected in various international treaties, such as the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, which advocates for free and accessible education at all levels.

Nigeria has weakly incorporated these goals into Section 18 of its Constitution. Professor Oloyede has a duty to prevent JAMB’s legacy as a revenue-driven institution from being passed on to his successor. If the federal government can no longer fund JAMB without compromising federal principles, the rational solution would be to dissolve the agency and allow tertiary institutions to manage their admissions independently based on their capacity.