For quite some time now, Nigeria’s Federal Ministry of Education and a few of its key agencies have been making bold headlines in the media for unedifying reasons. Policies and activity in some of these agencies have unleashed a crisis of monumental proportions on the polity — such that the resultant damages are largely irreversible.
As the dust raised by the Joint Admission and Matriculations Board (JAMB’s) technical glitches that marred the 2025 Unified Tertiary Matriculation Examination (UTME) is yet thick in the air, the National Universities Commission (NUC) wiped out the noble footprints made by some credible professional bodies, including the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Nigeria (ICAN) and the Chartered Institute of Bankers of Nigeria (CIBN) in university education.
The unprecedented “error” in the conduct of the 2025 UTME which affected hundreds of thousands of candidates, has continued to generate ethnic, tribal, religious, and geopolitical interests and tensions across Nigeria. The skewed nature of the impact of the UTME technical glitches against candidates in Southeast states made the “error” susceptible to various imputations.
Till date, the Professor Ishaq Oloyede-led tertiary education entrance exam body (JAMB) is still carrying on some “mop up” UTME exams in various locations in the Southeast states of Nigeria, to assuage frayed nerves. The crisis has put the credibility and integrity of the almost 50-year-old JAMB and its UTME into serious questions.
Even as these ‘make up’ efforts are ongoing, not a few interest groups are stridently calling for either the abrogation of JAMB and the UTME or the sacking of Oloyede, the JAMB registrar/CEO. Other groups, including both houses of the National Assembly, Ohaneze Nd’Igbo and some NGOs, have set up ad hoc panels to further probe JAMB.
As all these keep heating up the polity to no end, the NUC in carrying out a directive issued to it by the Federal Minister of Education Tunji Alausa, embarked on the stoppage of the accreditation of academic programmes by some professional bodies including ICAN and the CIBN, among others.
Alausa’s memo to the NUC’s executive secretary, dated May 9, 2025, said “henceforth, professional bodies shall no longer be allowed to conduct independent accreditation of academic programmes in Nigerian universities outside those carried out by the NUC.” He said: “This is to avoid duplication of efforts, increased financial costs, and limited access to higher education.”
Curiously, the memo gave exemption to seven professional bodies that have to continue with their accreditation programmes in the universities. It said “however, the following regulatory bodies are granted waivers to continue their regulatory activities in collaboration with your Commission to safeguard public health, legal integrity and prevent quackery…”
Alausa said: “Other professional bodies are advised to focus on post-graduate development of their members rather than engaging in the independent accreditation of academic programmes which have become counterproductive.” The NUC in turn, sent the minister’s directive to vice-chancellors of all Nigerian universities via a memo dated May 20, 2025.
However, while the minister of education may have some valid ground for the near-blanket ban on the professional bodies, the cases of the accountancy and banking professions look misplaced. If the NUC is giving exemptions to checkmate quackery, the accountancy and banking (regulatory) bodies — ICAN and CIBN — are the most fitting for such a treatment.
This is because the two very noble professions (accountancy and banking) have over the years been in the forefront of advocacy against quackery, and unprofessional conducts. Therefore, what the NUC has done is akin to throwing away the baby with the birth water.
The ministerial directive stopping bodies like ICAN and the CIBN from accrediting their respective courses in the universities stands as a violation of the core mandates of these (regulatory) institutions. The enabling laws of both professional bodies clearly spelt out their duties with respect to accreditation of courses at the universities.
The enabling law for the CIBN to accredit banking courses in universities is the CIBN Act No.5 of 2007. This Act grants the CIBN the authority to set standards of knowledge and skills for banking professionals, and to ensure the maintenance of ethical standards in the banking profession.
The CIBN is also tasked with accrediting education and training service providers, including university banking programmes, under the Central Bank of Nigeria Competency Framework. Accreditation by the CIBN ensures that universities offering banking courses meet the required standards of quality and that the programmes provide the necessary knowledge, skills, and competencies for the banking industry.
Similarly, the enabling law for the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Nigeria (ICAN) to accredit accounting courses in universities is the ICAN Act Number 15 of September 1, 1965. The Act empowers ICAN to regulate the accountancy profession and sets the framework for its various functions, including course accreditation.
Given the above enabling laws for the ICAN and the CIBN, both professional bodies have over the years been working hand-in-hand with the NUC and the Federal Ministry of Education in the upkeep of standards in universities. This entailed harmonisation of purely academic courses with ‘applied’ contents to produce well-rounded ‘chartered’ professionals, from the universities.
Both ICAN and CIBN have so perfected their frameworks and methods that for each university, course exemptions at foundation, intermediate or professional (exams) stages for undergraduates have been standardised over the years. The CIBN is also known to have developed ‘Linkage Programmes’ with numerous universities within and outside Nigeria.
Under the ‘Linkage Programme’ the Banking (and Finance) course content of the university is harmonised with the courses leading to the Associateship Certification of the CIBN. This entails the undergraduates taking the university exams, and taking the relevant levels of the CIBN’s “Diets”, and graduating with a first degree and chartered certification of the CIBN (i.e. ACIB).
Without a doubt, this ‘double certification’ has given many of its beneficiaries a head start in the banking and financial services industry. Holders of first degree in banking (and finance) plus the Associateship Certificate of the CIBN have continued to be outstanding (right from the entry level) in most financial institutions.
Given all this, the NUC’s directive would seem to amount to a disruption of a tried and tested arrangement by the CIBN and ICAN that has proven sustainable. Both reputable professional bodies have made giant footprints in the standards and quality of their respective (academic) disciplines in Nigerian universities.
The exclusion of the CIBN and the ICAN in the NUC’s approved list of professional bodies to continue accreditations in Nigerian universities is a setback. The new policy has thrown accountancy and banking into a limbo; and the directive needs some reconsideration!
- business a.m. commits to publishing a diversity of views, opinions and comments. It, therefore, welcomes your reaction to this and any of our articles via email: comment@businessamlive.com
