By Joy Odor Reportcircle News
Nigeria’s student loan programme has ignited a fresh political confrontation after a civil society organisation accused former presidential candidate Peter Obi of undermining a policy it says is easing access to tertiary education for hundreds of thousands of young Nigerians.
The Social Advocacy Front on Monday criticised Obi’s description of the scheme as wasteful, arguing the remark ignored the financial relief the initiative is already providing to students and families.
The programme in question is run by the Nigerian Education Loan Fund, established after Bola Ahmed Tinubu signed the student loan law in April 2024.
Its structure departs sharply from previous education financing attempts:
loans are interest-free
repayment begins only after employment and national service
deductions capped at 10% of income.
The design aims to prevent graduates from falling into immediate debt distress, a key criticism of student lending systems globally.
According to the group, the fund has already disbursed about ₦155 billion in tuition and upkeep support to more than 780,000 students, while roughly 1.3 million applicants have applied nationwide.
Beneficiaries span 262 tertiary institutions, covering universities, polytechnics and colleges of education.
The numbers suggest the programme is rapidly becoming one of the largest direct household education subsidies in recent Nigerian history.
Why the Reaction Matters
For decades, inability to pay fees has been a major driver of dropouts and delayed graduation in public institutions.
Supporters of the scheme argue that removing upfront tuition pressure could stabilise enrolment and reduce reliance on family borrowing, a factor that often pushes students into informal debt.
The advocacy group warned that dismissing the initiative as wasteful risks politicising a social investment intended to expand human capital.
The organisation also linked the credit programme to broader reforms, including the federal government’s push for nationwide Technical and Vocational Education and Training aimed at closing skills shortages in sectors such as construction, ICT and automotive services.
Together, policymakers hope the measures can improve employability while easing the cost barrier to higher education.
At its core, the clash reflects a wider policy question: should government fund access to tertiary education directly, or prioritise other economic investments?
For now, the student loan scheme has moved from policy rollout to political battleground and its ultimate verdict will likely depend less on rhetoric and more on whether graduates actually find jobs capable of repaying the loans.
If employment follows funding, the programme could redefine education access.
If not, the debate will only intensify.
