Opinion

Should NECO, UTME Be Scrapped?

Published

13 years ago

April 22, 2013

Two weeks ago, there were reports that the Federal Government was considering scrapping the National Examination Council (NECO) and the Unified Tertiary Matriculation Examination. Although the Federal Government is yet to make direct pronouncement on it, and has not given reasons for its proposed action, the reports have since kept many Nigerians in unconfortable suspense. In line with our policy to feel the pulse of Nigerians on contentious issues of national importance, our correspondent, Calista Ezeaku and photographer, Dele Obinna, went out to get people’s reactions on the proposed scrapping.

Excerpts.

Mr. Amadi Charles – School Principal.

In talking about the scrapping of NECO, we first of all have to look at the importance of that body, vis-à-vis the impact on the education of the masses. We are talking about bringing to the barest minimum illiteracy in this country and here is thinking about scrapping a body like NECO.

I think that the detrimental effect of such action on education of this country will be so grievous.

So, I’m thinking that WAEC as a body is popular, it’s known for the effectiveness, and efficiency in our educational system. But time has come that Nigeria should also look like other advanced or advancing countries that have most of these bodies assisting each other to improve the education system in their countries. So, if the Federal Government decides today to scrap NECO as a policy, who am I to say no. we are the implementers. We will only implement. But if you ask for my candid opinion, I would suggest that they should allow it and improve on the policies that established NECO.

Some people claim that NECO certificate has been bastardised and for that reason NECO should be scrapped. How on earth will somebody think of NECO certificate as being bastardised? WAEC has been in existence for many years, GCE London started even before the WAEC and it is still in existence. Now NECO came in just as a support to improve our system. So, I have not experienced the certificate of NECO being bastardized.

The only problem NECO has is that it is not internationally recognised. And so the certificate end up within Nigeria. The Federal Government would have tried their best to improve on NECO and also the standard so it could compete with other certificates which make candidates eligible to go for further studies abroad.

On the issue of UTME, before the establishment of UTME, there was a system that existed, people were going to universities. And the question is this, how were these people evaluated. What made them eligible? How were they examined, qualified to enter the universities? Yes, in the past, eligible candidates applied to the universities of their choice, then the universities set their exams and if you succeeded you would be admitted into these universities, until, may be they discovered some errors in that method, may be the universities bastardised the idea. And so the Federal Government came up with another body, having x-rayed the ideas and then set up the UTME and I don’t think that UTME has failed Nigerians. But one thing about Nigeria is that once a thing is established and a set of people feel they are not benefiting from it, they will start criticizing, they will start kicking against it and by the time you know it, once they are in power, they will scrap it, not minding the usefulness of that organisation.

So, I think the scrapping of UTME would have been a gradual thing if at-all the Federal Government needs to do that, because in scrapping UTME, it means that you would have set up a standard for the universities to follow for admissions. And the only body that has been doing it is the UTME and if you scrap it, what do you think will happen? Universities will bastardise admissions. You will begin to see people pay huge amount of money to gain admissions, enrich some pockets and possibly enrich some universities. That is the truth.

So, in my opinion, government should study the policies that brought up UTME. They should also properly supervise the activities of UTME so that the standard which is already set will be achieved and not just scrapping, scrapping, scrapping. Scrapping itself is also a way of dwindling the economy of this country. When you set up one thing today, invest on it, tomorrow you pull it out, that money is gone. Again, it is also going to create a lot of problem for the employees. Where will you put all the employees of the scrapped agencies or organs? That will increase the unemployment rate in the country and reduce the educational standard in the country.

Mr. Idagogo Ida Annie – Teacher.

In my opinion, I think there is no need to scrap UTME because it is an entrance examination into the universities. I feel that it gives a kind of uniformity in terms of the yardstick for the entrance examinations.

But if you allow individual universities to conduct entrance examination, there will be no uniformity and the standard may vary. Some schools may have high standard, some may have low standard, but with UTME, all the universities have equal entrance examination standard. We should also appreciate the effort being made by this body to ensure high standard. Before now, when candidates wrote UTME exams it took up to three or four weeks before the result would come out. But if you observe, in recent times, its no longer like that, under one week or a few days, the results are out. So there is a lot if improvement.

As for NECO, it is just a national examination conducted by Nigerian government, which is not accepted in other countries. So, there is no need for it if it is not accepted. You may have a child here who has NECO certificate and as a parent you may like the child to go to another country for further studies, and if the country does not accept NECO, it’s of no use. So, I think NECO should be scrapped and WAEC should be improved upon.

Chidi ThankGod – Student

I think NECO makes things easy for students. Before NECO was established, students were sitting for WAEC for several years without success. That made some people to abandon their academic pursuit. But with the establishment of NECO, things became easy for student. They now have the opportunity of sitting for two exams instead of only WAEC. If you sit for WAEC and you cannot make it, you try NECO. That does not mean that NECO exams are easier or the standard lower than WAEC but peoples’ luck are different. Some may find it difficult to make it in NECO, they may succeed in WAEC while it will be the other way for others. So, NECO should not be scrapped because it serves as an alternative to WAEC and makes things easier for students.

Again, the level of corruption in this country is so high that it is messing up a lot of things in this country. The negative impunities being injected into the academic sector increases day by day, starting from the top. So I think JAMB, UTME or whatever you call them are not really helping matters. A situation where students will be preparing to write JAMB exams and may be two or three weeks before the exams, the papers are leaked, tells a lot of story about that examination body. JAMB officials use these papers to make money. And that’s why some people who cannot even write their names score very high in UTME and would probably be offered admission in the universities while the best brains who wrote the JAMB exam without expo and could not score as high are denied admission.

So, I think the idea of allowing individual universities to conduct own entrance examinations is a welcome development. It will reduce the stress of writing JAMB and failing it every year. It will also minimize the number of exams that students are subjected to WAEC, NECO, JAMB, Post-UTME and others just to enable one gain admission into the university.

But I think a standard should be set for all the universities which must be adhered to. If other universities and tertiary institutions can key into the vision of Prof. Fakae of Rivers State University of Science and Technology of using computer for exams, it will reduce exam malpractices, raise the standard of education and ensure that the best are admitted into these institution irrespective of whether the person is from a poor or rich background.

If other higher institutions can adopt the method of using computers for exams without hacking into the code (which is what I was saying about the rate of corruption), it will really make things easy.

Mr. Godbless Nwala – Student

I’m of the opinion that NECO should be scraped. Any body that is not able to make his papers in WAEC will also not be able to make it in NECO. Again, scraping NECO will make students to actually sit up and study very well to pass WAEC exams since they know there is no other alternative.

On the issue of entrance examination into the universities, I think number of examinations that students are forced to take should be reduced. And if scrapping UTME and empowering individual universities to conduct entrance examinations will help us achieve that, then so be it.

Really, the idea of students writing UTME or JAMB and going to the universities to write Post-UME exams is frustrating, uneconomical, and stressful. And the way the post UME exams are conducted in some universities is not encouraging at all, only children of the rich who can pay some stipulated amount of money are given admission while the children of the poor are left out.

Let me also point out that because of level of corruption going on in JAMB, students don’t study for the exams because the papers will be in circulation weeks or days before the exams, so there is no need losing one’s sleep over it. But for post-UME exams, students take it more serious because there are no micro chips. You write the exam on your own.

So I’m of the opinion that NECO and UTME should be scrapped while WAEC and universities should take over the conduct of these exams. It will make the students to be more serious and raise our academic standard.

Miss Anabel Elvis – UTME Candidate.

The stress involved in writing UTME is much but I still prefer it to allowing universities to conduct their entrance examinations. If universities take over the responsibility of conducting admission examinations, admission would be for the highest bidder and not on merit.

As I said earlier, JAMB is really stressful, for instance, since morning, I’ve been moving round this campus (RSUST) looking for the exam centre without success. Nobody is even ready to direct you to the right place to go or provide answers to your questions but JAMB is still a preferred option.

It gives everybody a level playing ground. The intimidation and discrimination that will be associated with empowering the universities to admit students will be too much. They may end up admitting only indigenes and leave out the non-indigenes and all that.

Opinion

Towards Affordable Living Houses

Published

2 days ago

December 22, 2025

The Tide

Quote:” Increasingly viewed as a commodity, housing is most importantly a human right. Under international law, to be adequately housed means having secure tenure—not having to worry about being evicted or having your home or lands taken away”

The rising cost of house rents across cities and urban areas across Nigeria is most worrisome to say the least. More worrisome is the fact that while house rents are on a geometric increase, and the cost of living is astronomically high, the economy has remained most unfriendly and salaries very disproportionate to the basic necessities of life. Some State legislatures, like Lagos, have legislated on house rent control to check the Shylock attitude of some landlords. As good and necessary as such Legislative intervention, the feasibility of effectively controlling housing rents without adequate participation of public and organized private sector in remedying the housing deficit in Nigeria, in my considered view, is like building castles in the air, which will inevitably translate to an exercise in futility.

The reasons are not far-fetched: the spiralling prices of building materials today leaves much to be desired bringing house owners to face the challenge of property maintenance. No doubt the cost of building a house is about ten times more than it was five years ago. It is so bad that people wonder if civil servants and other low income earners can ever build a house. The hyper inflationary trend in the country has compounded the situation reinforcing the reality of the economic law that increase in the prices of essential commodity will inevitably result in increase in the prices of other commodities because the dealers will need to increase the price of their products or commodities to remain in business.

Though Nigeria is not as populous as China with a conservative 1.4 billion population, and having the capacity to provide to the housing needs of her people, it is not saying a new thing that the growing population of Nigeria and rural-urban migration has heightened the quest for decent living houses with more money chasing scarce accomodations.The terms of payment is very outrageous as house agents cash on housing deficit to connive with landlords to unwittingly increase rents and the monetary requirements to access a decent living place. One can’t imagine how a two bedroom flat will go for N1.2 million to be paid for two years, exclusive of the pecuniary benefits accruing to the house agents and legal fees and other outrageous charges.

Corruption is another major problem of housing deficit as government allocations to the housing sector were either outrightly embezzled or misappropriated with impunity. Housing need remains endemic in most nations of the world, including Nigeria. As a basic material necessity, of humans, availability of adequate and affordable housing has become one of the challenges government at all levels, multinational or corporate organisations must grapple with. The United Nations’ Year 2000 Millennium Development Goals which includes “Shelter for all”, has failed to address housing deficits 25 years after it was initiated. According to reports, of a global population of about eight billion people, more than 1.8 billion people live in informal settlements or inadequate housing with limited access to essential services such as water and sanitation, electricity and are often under threat of forced eviction.

One of the most severe violations of the right to adequate housing—homelessness—has been on a steep increase in many economically advanced countries. Housing is a right not a commodity. Increasingly viewed as a commodity, housing is most importantly a human right. Under international law, to be adequately housed means having secure tenure—not having to worry about being evicted or having your home or lands taken away. It means living somewhere that is in keeping with your culture, and having access to appropriate services, schools, and employment. Too often violations of the right to housing occur with impunity. In part, this is because, at the domestic level, housing is rarely treated as a human right. The key to ensuring adequate housing is the implementation of this human right through appropriate government policy and programmes, including national housing strategies.

Adequate housing was recognized as part of the right to an adequate standard of living in article 25 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in article 11.1 of the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Other international human rights treaties have si

nce recognized or referred to the right to adequate housing or some elements of it, such as the protection of one’s home and privacy. According to the UN Charter and Declaration, adequate housing is protected against forced evictions and the arbitrary destruction and demolition of one’s home; free from arbitrary interference with one’s home, privacy and family; and right to choose one’s residence, to determine where to live and to freedom of movement.

Looking at what adequate housing entails, it is obvious that fixing housing deficits is capital intensive project that will be perennial to achieve through private and government synergy. The roles of housing as the basis of stability and security for an individual or family can not be undermined. As the centre of our social, emotional and sometimes economic lives, a home should be a sanctuary—a place to live in peace, security and dignity. According to The United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights the right to adequate housing should not be interpreted narrowly. Rather, it should be seen as the right to live somewhere in security, peace and dignity. The characteristics of the right to adequate housing are clarified mainly in the Committee’s general comments No. 4 (1991) on the right to adequate housing and No. 7 (1997) on forced evictions.

Therefore, Government at all levels should synergise with the Private sector to intentionally and consciously drive the initiative to mitigate housing deficit in Nigeria. Government budgetary allocations should not be seen as a national cake but be made to perform optimally by those in the saddle. Value should be given to every kobo, while corruption should be checked.

By; Igbiki Benibo

Opinion

The Labour Union We Want

Published

2 days ago

December 22, 2025

The Tide

Quote:”Symbolic street protests are not enough; workers want actions that translate into real improvements in their daily lives.”

It was refreshing to see the leadership of the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) finally spring into action after many months of apparent silence. For a long time, organised labour seemed to have slipped into a coma while workers groaned under worsening economic and social conditions. Poor governance, rising insecurity, and deepening poverty continued unchecked, yet labour’s voice was barely heard. This silence understandably drew criticism from workers and the wider public, many of whom questioned whether the NLC was still living up to its historic role as defender of the masses. Historically, Nigerian labour has stood firmly on the side of the people. From the anti-colonial struggles of the 1940s to resistance against military dictatorship and anti-people economic policies, labour has played a critical role in shaping national consciousness. The historic 1945 strike, which lasted 45 days, forced the colonial government to improve wages and working conditions and cemented labour’s place as a force for social justice.

During the military era, particularly under Generals Ibrahim Babangida and Sani Abacha, the NLC was among the few institutions bold enough to challenge authoritarian rule and oppose the Structural Adjustment Programme, warning—correctly—that it would deepen poverty and inequality. Perhaps the most defining moment in recent labour history came in January 2012, when the NLC and the Trade Union Congress (TUC) led nationwide protests against the removal of fuel subsidy by the Goodluck Jonathan administration. The Occupy Nigeria protests paralysed economic activities and forced a partial reversal of the policy, reminding Nigerians of the power of a united and courageous labour movement. Against this backdrop, the NLC’s decision to call a nationwide protest on Wednesday, December 17, over rising cost of living, poverty, and insecurity came as a welcome relief.

It rekindled hope that organised labour is reclaiming its relevance. For workers enduring hardship with little institutional backing, the protest symbolised courage, consistency, and a willingness to confront policies that worsen the lives of ordinary Nigerians. However, Nigerians expect more than symbolic street protests. The real test lies ahead. Labour leaders must counter the long-held perception that union leadership often “sells out” during negotiations, placing personal or political interests above collective welfare. Whether fair or not, this perception has weakened trust in organised labour. As former NLC president Adams Oshiomhole once warned, labour must not become “a pressure group that barks but does not bite.” Workers expect transparency, firmness, and outcomes that translate into real improvements in their lives.

One urgent issue demanding labour’s sustained attention is fuel subsidy removal. President Bola Tinubu justified the policy in 2023 as necessary to curb corruption and free funds for development. Nigerians were promised that savings would be redirected into infrastructure, social welfare, and economic growth. Two years later, however, many citizens see little evidence of these gains. Instead, they face skyrocketing fuel prices, transport costs, food inflation, and an unbearable cost of living.Labour must therefore demand accountability: How much has been saved? Where has the money gone? Which projects are directly linked to these funds? These are legitimate questions that deserve honest answers. Closely related is the unresolved issue of Nigeria’s state-owned refineries in Port Harcourt, Warri, and Kaduna. Billions of dollars have reportedly been spent on turnaround maintenance, yet the refineries remain largely non-functional.

Former NNPC chief Mele Kyari repeatedly assured Nigerians that the refineries would be operational by 2023, promises that were not fulfilled. Today, conflicting claims about their status continue to fuel public frustration.This presents another opportunity for organised labour to assert relevance by demanding transparency on funds spent, current operational capacity, and accountability for failures. Without this, Nigeria risks repeating cycles of waste and deception. Beyond petrol, the rising cost of cooking gas has become a major burden for households. Despite Nigeria’s vast gas reserves, inadequate domestic production, limited processing facilities, and poor infrastructure have made locally sourced gas scarce and expensive. Heavy reliance on imports paid for in dollars means that naira depreciation continues to drive prices upward.

Labour must expand its advocacy beyond wages to include structural reforms that reduce import dependence and shield workers from inflationary shocks. Security also remains a critical concern. While recent steps such as reducing police protection for VIPs and recruiting more officers are commendable, they are insufficient. Nigerian workers still live in fear of kidnapping, robbery, and violent attacks. Many now weigh personal safety before accepting jobs or commuting to work. No worker should risk their life simply to earn a living. Labour must consistently pressure government to prioritise security, intelligence, and community-based policing while addressing root causes like unemployment and poverty. At the heart of labour agitation is workers’ welfare. Nigerian workers need wages that reflect harsh economic realities, not salaries eroded daily by inflation and currency depreciation.

Prompt salary payments, regular minimum wage reviews, inflation-linked adjustments, job security, and enforcement of labour laws are no longer optional—they are essential. Casualisation, arbitrary dismissals, and denial of pensions have become widespread and must be firmly resisted. Most importantly, workers need hope—hope rooted in job creation, affordable healthcare, quality education, and dignity for labour. The labour union Nigerians want is not one that surfaces only in moments of crisis, but one that remains vigilant, principled, and unwavering. It must understand the pulse of the people, confront injustice boldly, and refuse to compromise workers’ welfare for anything less than the collective good.

By: Calista Ezeaku

Opinion

Wike VS Soldier’s Altercation: Matters Arising

Published

2 weeks ago

December 8, 2025

The Tide

The events that unfolded in Abuja on Tuesday November 11, 2025 between the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Chief Nyesom Wike and a detachment of soldiers guarding a disputed property, led by Adams Yerima, a commissioned Naval Officer, may go down as one of the defining images of Nigeria’s democratic contradictions. It was not merely a quarrel over land. It was a confrontation between civil authority and the military legacy that still hovers over our national life.

Nyesom Wike, fiery and fearless as always, was seen on video exchanging words with a uniformed officer who refused to grant him passage to inspect a parcel of land alleged to have been illegally acquired. The minister’s voice rose, his temper flared, and the soldier, too, stood his ground, insisting on his own authority. Around them, aides, security men, and bystanders watched, stunned, as two embodiments of the Nigerian state clashed in the open.

The images spread fast, igniting debates across drawing rooms, beer parlours, and social media platforms. Some hailed Wike for standing up to military arrogance; others scolded him for perceived disrespect to the armed forces. Yet beneath the noise lies a deeper question about what sort of society we are building and whether power in Nigeria truly understands the limits of its own reach.

It is tragic that, more than two decades into civil rule, the relationship between the civilian arm of government and the military remains fragile and poorly understood. The presence of soldiers in a land dispute between private individuals and the city administration is, by all civic standards, an aberration. It recalls a dark era when might was right, and uniforms conferred immunity against accountability.

Wike’s anger, even if fiery, was rooted in a legitimate concern: that no individual, however connected or retired, should deploy the military to protect personal interests. That sentiment echoes the fundamental democratic creed that the law is supreme, not personalities. If his passion overshot decorum, it was perhaps a reflection of a nation weary of impunity.

On the other hand, the soldier in question is a symbol of another truth: that discipline, respect for order, and duty to hierarchy are ingrained in our armed forces. He may have been caught between conflicting instructions one from his superiors, another from a civilian minister exercising his lawful authority. The confusion points not to personal failure but to institutional dysfunction.

It is, therefore, simplistic to turn the incident into a morality play of good versus evil.

*********”**** What happened was an institutional embarrassment. Both men represented facets of the same failing system a polity still learning how to reconcile authority with civility, law with loyalty, and service with restraint.

In fairness, Wike has shown himself as a man of uncommon courage. Whether in Rivers State or at the FCTA, he does not shy away from confrontation. Yet courage without composure often feeds misunderstanding. A public officer must always be the cooler head, even when provoked, because the power of example outweighs the satisfaction of winning an argument.

Conversely, soldiers, too, must be reminded that their uniforms do not place them above civilian oversight. The military exists to defend the nation, not to enforce property claims or intimidate lawful authorities. Their participation in purely civil matters corrodes the image of the institution and erodes public trust.

One cannot overlook the irony: in a country where kidnappers roam highways and bandits sack villages, armed men are posted to guard contested land in the capital. It reflects misplaced priorities and distorted values. The Nigerian soldier, trained to defend sovereignty, should not be drawn into private or bureaucratic tussles.

Sycophancy remains the greatest ailment of our political culture. Many of those who now cheer one side or the other do so not out of conviction but out of convenience. Tomorrow they will switch allegiance. True patriotism lies not in defending personalities but in defending principles. A people enslaved by flattery cannot nurture a culture of justice.

The Nigerian elite must learn to submit to the same laws that govern the poor. When big men fence off public land and use connections to shield their interests, they mock the very constitution they swore to uphold. The FCT, as the mirror of national order, must not become a jungle where only the powerful can build.

The lesson for Wike himself is also clear: power is best exercised with calmness. The weight of his office demands more than bravery; it demands statesmanship. To lead is not merely to command, but to persuade — even those who resist your authority.

Equally, the lesson for the armed forces is that professionalism shines brightest in restraint. Obedience to illegal orders is not loyalty; it is complicity. The soldier who stands on the side of justice protects both his honour and the dignity of his uniform.

The Presidency, too, must see this episode as a wake-up call to clarify institutional boundaries. If soldiers can be drawn into civil enforcement without authorization, then our democracy remains at risk of subtle militarization. The constitution must speak louder than confusion.

The Nigerian public deserves better than spectacles of ego. We crave leaders who rise above emotion and officers who respect civilian supremacy. Our children must not inherit a nation where authority means shouting matches and intimidation in public glare.

Every democracy matures through such tests. What matters is whether we learn the right lessons. The British once had generals who defied parliament; the Americans once fought over states’ rights; Nigeria, too, must pass through her own growing pains but with humility, not hubris.

If the confrontation has stirred discomfort, then perhaps it has done the nation some good. It forces a conversation long overdue: Who truly owns the state — the citizen or the powerful? Can we build a Nigeria where institutions, not individuals, define our destiny?

As the dust settles, both the FCTA and the military hierarchy must conduct impartial investigations. The truth must be established — not to shame anyone, but to restore order. Where laws were broken, consequences must follow. Where misunderstandings occurred, apologies must be offered.

Let the rule of law triumph over the rule of impulse. Let civility triumph over confrontation. Let governance return to the path of dialogue and procedure.

Nigeria cannot continue to oscillate between civilian bravado and military arrogance. Both impulses spring from the same insecurity — the fear of losing control. True leadership lies in the ability to trust institutions to do their work without coercion.

Those who witnessed the clash saw a drama of two gladiators. One in starched khaki, one in well-cut suit. Both proud, both unyielding. But a nation cannot be built on stubbornness; it must be built on understanding. Power, when it meets power, should produce order, not chaos.

We must resist the temptation to glorify temper. Governance is not warfare; it is stewardship. The citizen watches, the world observes, and history records. How we handle moments like this will define our collective maturity.

The confrontation may have ended without violence, but it left deep questions in the national conscience. When men of authority quarrel in the open, institutions tremble. The people, once again, become spectators in a theatre of misplaced pride.

It is time for all who hold office — civilian or military — to remember that they serve under the same flag. That flag is neither khaki nor political colour; it is green-white-green, and it demands humility.

No victor, no vanquish only a lesson for a nation still learning to govern itself with dignity.

By; King Onunwor