Nigeria’s growing pattern of policy reversals is fast becoming an embarrassing hallmark of governance. The latest example is the ill-advised decision by the Federal Ministry of Education, the West African Examinations Council (WAEC) and the National Examinations Council (NECO) to increase the registration fees for the West African Senior School Certificate Examination and NECO examinations from N27,000 to as much as N50,000.
Following widespread public outrage, the authorities suspended the proposed increase within 24 hours. But the suspension is little more than an afterthought aimed at calming public anger. In a country where the minimum wage is N70,000 per month and about 133 million people live in extreme poverty, such a punitive increase should not merely be suspended; it should be scrapped altogether.
WAEC had been charging N30,000 before proposing an increase to N50,000, an 82 per cent jump, while the proposed NECO increase represented a 66.7 per cent rise. Such steep increases are unreasonable, insensitive and potentially regressive.
Under Minister of Education Tunji Alausa, as well as during the tenure of his predecessor, the education sector has been plagued by a succession of policy reversals and avoidable controversies.
These include the moratorium on establishing new public universities, the decision to raise the minimum university admission age to 18 before reversing it to 16, and the release of an error-filled list of governing councils for universities and other tertiary institutions before its subsequent withdrawal.
The proposed examination fee increase was itself the product of a meeting between Alausa and WAEC and NECO in March. The examination bodies defended the proposal on the grounds of protecting the integrity of their examinations.
The Federal Government, on the other hand, cited economic realities, public concerns and the need for inclusive, transparent and evidence-based policymaking as reasons for suspending the policy.
Ironically, that explanation underscores the weakness of the process that produced the policy in the first place. The proposal was fundamentally misguided and reflected a troubling tendency to take the economic realities of ordinary Nigerians for granted.
It is particularly disturbing that a country already struggling with poor educational outcomes would contemplate a policy capable of further restricting access to education rather than expanding it.
Nigeria has more than 18.3 million out-of-school children, widely regarded as the highest figure in the world. Poverty, insecurity and chronic underinvestment remain major drivers of the crisis. Increasing examination fees would only make the situation worse by placing another financial barrier before vulnerable families.
WAEC and NECO had already raised the cost of internal examinations to N27,000 in 2023 from N13,950, where it had remained since 2016. Even at the existing rate, many state governments, Parent-Teacher Associations and old students’ associations have had to step in to help indigent students register for the examinations.
Education is the foundation of every modern society. Yet in Nigeria, the constitutional commitment to education remains largely unfulfilled. Chapter II of the 1999 Constitution provides that government should pursue policies that ensure equal and adequate educational opportunities at all levels.
The reality, however, is far removed from that constitutional promise.
Ghana and Sierra Leone fully fund the WASSCE fees of their students, while The Gambia covers part of the cost. In Nigeria, about 15 states claim to sponsor candidates, but implementation has been inconsistent. Only a few have maintained the policy steadily, while others provide support selectively or irregularly.
NECO has also disclosed that some state governments owe it about N2 billion in unpaid examination fees and has threatened to withhold the results of candidates in 19 indebted states.
Given Nigeria’s larger economy and considerable resource base compared with Ghana, Sierra Leone and The Gambia, there is a compelling case for governments at all levels to shoulder the cost of these examinations. Such expenditure should not be viewed merely as a subsidy but as an investment in human capital and national development.
At the very least, the Federal Government and state governments should absorb the difference between the current examination fees and any increase that can be reasonably justified.
President Bola Tinubu’s fiscal reforms have significantly increased allocations to federal and state governments. It is therefore difficult to justify transferring yet another financial burden to families already struggling with rising living costs.
Significantly, while WAEC and NECO proposed substantial increases, the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board moved in the opposite direction by reducing its application fee from N5,000 to N3,500. The contrast demonstrates that lower costs remain possible when institutions pursue efficiency.
The proposed increase also raises questions about the planned transition from manual examinations to computer-based testing. If digitisation is expected to reduce some of the logistical and administrative costs associated with paper-based examinations, the authorities owe Nigerians a clear explanation for such a steep increase in fees.
Education remains one of the most powerful engines of national development. Countries such as China that have consistently invested heavily in education have emerged as global leaders in technology, manufacturing, innovation and productivity.
Nigeria’s poor performance on several development indicators is, in significant measure, a reflection of decades of inadequate investment in education.
The answer, therefore, is not to erect additional financial barriers to education. Federal, state and local governments must instead treat education as an urgent national priority, increase investment in the sector and make quality education genuinely accessible to every Nigerian child.
That is not merely a social obligation. It is the foundation for sustainable national development.
This version is written in a stronger editorial/news-analysis style, with a headline suited to a newspaper opinion page.
