TD The National Association of Nigerian Students (NANS) has strongly criticised former Senator Dino Melaye over his recent comments about the Nigerian Education Loan Fund (NELFUND), particularly his claim that the scheme provides students with only ₦20,000.
Melaye, a chieftain of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), had described NELFUND as a “haven of corruption” and questioned the adequacy of the financial support provided to Nigerian students.
Speaking during a television appearance, Melaye questioned how the Federal Government could claim to be paying students’ school fees when the amount publicly associated with the scheme was ₦20,000.
“Which government school takes ₦20,000 as annual school fees?” Melaye asked, according to reports of his remarks.
His comments prompted a response from NANS President, Distinguished Comrade Akinteye Babatunde Afeez, popularly known as Babtee.
In a statement dated September 28, Afeez accused the former senator of misunderstanding the structure of the student-loan programme and misrepresenting the role of the ₦20,000 payment.
NANS described Melaye’s comments as a “gross misrepresentation of facts” and argued that the ₦20,000 figure does not represent the total amount available to beneficiaries under NELFUND.
How NELFUND’s Student Loan Works
Available NELFUND documentation indicates that the student-loan programme has separate components for institutional fees and upkeep.
NELFUND’s official terms and conditions state that the loan amount can comprise “institutional fees and/or upkeep”.
It noted that beneficiaries are responsible for repaying loans paid either to their educational institutions or directly to them for upkeep.
NELFUND’s earlier explanations of the programme also established that institutional charges are paid to the beneficiary’s institution, while the upkeep component is paid directly to the student’s account.
In 2024, NELFUND’s management publicly described the upkeep allowance as ₦20,000 per month, separate from institutional fees.
The Fund said it paid institutional charges directly to schools while the upkeep allowance went to students.
This means that Melaye’s characterisation of the entire NELFUND intervention as a ₦20,000 payment does not correspond with the structure of the programme described by NELFUND.
However, the adequacy of the upkeep allowance and the overall impact of the loan scheme remain legitimate subjects for public debate.
Meanwhile, Nigerian students and families particularly face rising education and living costs.
NANS President Releases Video Message
Following the controversy, Afeez released a video message directed at Nigerian students, further explaining NELFUND’s operations and responding to Melaye’s comments.
In the video, Afeez defended the student-loan initiative and urged students to understand the distinction between institutional payments and personal upkeep support.
He argued that reducing the entire scheme to the ₦20,000 upkeep component gives the public an incomplete picture of the programme.
NELFUND’s own current website reports that more than 1.08 million students across 37 states have benefited from its educational support.
It indicated that more than ₦191 billion in loans have been disbursed and more than 320 institutional partners recorded.
Criticism From Students
The controversy has nevertheless generated criticism from some Nigerians, including students and social-media users.
These questioned whether the loan programme addresses the underlying problem of rising tuition and other education-related expenses.
One commenter, identified as @seunibk01, sarcastically argued that increases in tuition fees had made education more difficult for families before the introduction of loans.
@seunibk01 posted:
“Arindin. They increased your tuition fees such that your parents couldn’t afford it and they now introduced loan to you to pay up.”
“Arindin” is a derogatory Yoruba term implying foolishness, reflecting the poster’s view that the policy creates debt dependency rather than solving access to education.
Another user, @Makesen54271406, dismissed the programme as a “scam”.
He argued that it merely reallocates money rather than addressing the broader challenges confronting Nigeria’s education sector.
@Makesen54271406 noted:
“The summary of your post: NELFUND IS STILL A SCAM. Yes that you rob Paul to pay Peter makes it a scam.”
The post sarcastically questioned the student leader’s age while dismissing NELFUND as a scam.
The reply frames NELFUND as “robbing Peter to pay Paul”.
It critiqued it as mere fund reallocation rather than genuine support for students amid Nigeria’s education funding challenges.
Those comments represent individual reactions on social media and do not establish that NELFUND is fraudulent.
The controversy therefore centres on two separate issues: what NELFUND actually pays and whether the overall support is sufficient to meet students’ educational needs.
A Dispute Over Facts and Adequacy
The available documentation supports NANS’s central clarification that the ₦20,000 figure is an upkeep component.
It noted that institutional charges constitute a separate part of the student-loan programme.
At the same time, criticism over the adequacy of the allowance, rising institutional charges, repayment obligations and the implementation of the scheme remains part of the wider debate over student financing in Nigeria.
NELFUND’s official terms make clear that beneficiaries incur repayment obligations on loans paid both to their institutions and for their upkeep.
The dispute between Melaye and NANS consequently extends beyond the ₦20,000 figure, touching on the larger question of whether Nigeria’s student-loan model is providing sufficient and sustainable support for access to higher education.
