Opinion
Enough Of This Rip Off
Daily, Nigerian newspapers are awash with employment or recruitment advertisements.
Ordinarily, such adverts should call for celebration as hiring new hands is an indication that the economy is looking up, in spite of the comatose vital manufacturing sector. But it is bewildering to observe that many paid adverts for recruitment require applicants to purchase scratch cards of two thousand naira (N2,000,00) and above for application forms that are usually accessed online. Ever since, some government departments and agencies including the Police pioneered it,demanding payments from job applicants has become the rule rather than the exception. While I cogitated on reasons government departments and agencies will resort to ripping off poor applicants when money may have been provided in their budgets for recruitment, I could not but be disconcerted at the insensitivity of some of our policy makers.
Like everything Nigerian, the concept has caught on. Many a smart Alec now sees it as a route to easy money; far easier than Yahoo Yahoo and without the perpetrators having to look behind their shoulders, at least at the moment, for agents of EFCC.
It is as easy as ABC. Arrange an organization. Talk with scratch card producers.
Prepare adverts with well-laid out graphics featuring well-fed faces. Place the advert in the print and electronic media. Sit back and watch the millions roll in.
This is absurdly ridiculous. No where in the world are applicants for jobs fleeced this way. Indeed, the reverse is the case. In organized societies, applicants who have been screened, shortlisted and invited for interview are paid to cover hotelexpenses and fare to and from the location of interview. That has been the practice even in this country. Government agencies and reputable companies pay applicants short-listed and invited for interview. The EU/Ministry of Health job interviews of April 2004 is an example in this regard.
More worrisome is the demand for money from potential recruits into the Nigerian Navy and Air Force. Where does the money go? Is there no budget to cover the cost of recruitment? Why fleece someone who has decided to make a career in the armed forces, someone who could lay down his life for the country at any moment? In the developed world, there are incentives for joining the Army. At the height of the Iraq war, such incentives were made even more enticing.
It is disquieting and certainly disheartening to observe that even nonprofit organizations and voluntary agencies have joined in the mad rush to further impoverish the unemployed amongst us. Page 76 of The Guardian of Tuesday August 5,2008, carried two nausea-inducing adverts. One of the adverts was placed by Accident Victims Rescue & Information Services of Nigeria (AVRIS) and the other by AFRIDEV (whatever that means) that claims to be a member of International Volunteer Programme.
Both are supposedly non-profit organizations. While Accident Victims Rescue and Information Services of Nigeria is asking each applicant to part with two thousand and five hundred naira, AFRIDEV is demanding Two Thousand Naira per prospective volunteer. Most recently, the Imo State Government advertised 10, 000 vacant positions that required the unemployed to part with two thousand naira.
The last recruitment exercise of the Immigration Service for about 7000 positions attracted well over 300,000 applicants. Assuming the same number of applicants responds to each of the adverts for non-existent vacancies or volunteer positions, AFRIDEV and AVRIS will rake in six hundred and fifty million naira (N650,000,000.00) and Seven Hundred and Fifty Million Naira (N750,000,000.00) respectively. And AVRIS was recruiting the second batch! It is most absurd and indeed absolutely ethically wrong for job applicants to be made to pay for application forms. It is tales of the unexpected made manifest. Nigerians need be wary of organisations requesting fees from job or volunteer applicants.
It is an apparent red flag. The argument that the application fee is demanded to cover the cost of recruitment and to reduce the volume of respondents is as hollow as it is implausible.
In its advert calling for volunteers to be sent oversees, AFRIDEV claims that volunteers will “assist various organizations abroad in community development projects/humanitarian work on going in various countries such as Spain, USA, Portugal, Denmark, Switzerland, UK, Canada, Macedonia, Brazil, Poland, Europe (sic),South America (sic) etc”. Continuing, the advert claims that “volunteers are paid attractive monthly allowances”. Like American visa lottery that attracts hundreds of thousands of entries from Nigeria, this one is sure going to be a hit. When young Nigerians risk life and limb to try to get to Europe through the Sahara and many die in the process in the desert or by drowning in canoe wrecks, this option will be considered a safer bet to try.
Other than brief visits, I have not lived in Europe so I am not in a position to assess their needs for foreign volunteers and from Nigeria for that matter, with our reputation. But I can emphatically assert America does not need foreign volunteers. At all times, they have more than enough volunteers for community service.
Following the regrettable events of September II, 2001 in America, as the Executive Director of a Nigerian non-profit organisation that catered to victims of disasters – natural or man-made, I wrote to the then American Ambassador to Nigeria, Mr. Edward Jeter informing him of my organisation’s resolve to send in volunteers to assist in the aftermath of the collapse of the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York. He wrote to thank me profusely for identifying with America in such trying times but diplomatically turned down our offer, saying that the disaster galvanised Americans as never before who volunteered in droves to assist the victims.
Besides while in the US, I was involved with a humanitarian organisation in management position that requires working directly with volunteers. In my almost two and a half years in the position I did not see or hear of foreign volunteers no even at the height of Hurricane Katrina with the massive and extensive damage that it visited on New Orleans, Alabama and Mississippi. Additionally, volunteers are not paid attractive monthly allowances; they receive daily subsistence allowances (DSA), according to UN Agencies recommendations. The Encarta World English Dictionary defines subsistence as the condition of being or managing to stay alive, especially when there is barely enough food or money for survival.
This advert is preying on the poverty and gullibility of Nigerians who daily throng the foreign embassies of the above listed countries in attempts to secure visas to escape the unemployment that is prevalent here. When genuine visitors, businessmen and even government sponsored teams like sportsmen and women are occasionally refused visas because of the fear of absconding and becoming illegal immigrants, someone is advertising that they will secure visas for volunteers who could stay up to one month, six months and 2 years.
Which countries are in dire need of volunteers? Is it the developed countries or the developing ones? Additionally, who is the person that volunteers? Is it not someone who is gainfully employed or a retiree that gives some of his/her time to do community work? Who is that Nigerian employer that will allow his employee to leave his duty station for overseas volunteer assignment for 6 months or 2 years? With the benefit of experience, many volunteers in Nigeria are not gainfully employed.
As the Executive Director of Doctors For All Nations, I led volunteers from Lagos, Warri and Port Harcourt to Jesse oil fire disaster of October 1998. Volunteers who were employed returned to their jobs after three days on the ground. The unemployed volunteers remained with us for upwards of 4 weeks. And why oversees volunteering? “Charity”, they say “begins at home”. Have we finished clearing all the drains that are clogged with unsightly pure water sachets and other refuse that cause floods each time it rains in Lagos, for example?
What of the mountains of refuse that block roads and breed rodents and other forms of life that are enemies of man? Taking undue advantage of the high level of unemployment and unwariness in the country to fleece unsuspecting members of the public who are already disadvantaged is nothing but callousness. Calling a spade by its name, it is obtaining money by false pretense.
Let us assume that there are 10500 genuine vacancies that an organization wants to fill and 300,000 applicants responded and paid the prescribed fee, the organization would have swindled 289,500 applicants of their money for whom no service was provided. Our ‘human rights activists’ who are quick to match in the streets of Abuja do not see anything wrong in swindling applicants and further impoverishing them.
This obnoxious and patently fraudulent practice has, for too long, been allowed unfettered space. The Consumer Protection Council, SSS, Police and EFCC, amongst other law enforcement agencies, should do the needful: stop this rip off. It gladdens my heart to observe that JAMB that hitherto charged students to check their results online, has as a result of public outcry, stopped this bad practice. Kudos to JAMB.
Dr. Ahworegba is of the Biographies Development Centre, Lagos.
Prosper Ufuoma Ahworegba
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
