Editorial
RSU: Reconsider No Fees, No Exam Policy
The recent decision by the authorities of Rivers State University (RSU) to stop students who are still ow
ing school fees from writing their second-semester examinations is seriously troubling and raises widespread concerns for not only residents of Rivers State but stakeholders in the education sector as well.
Earlier, the university authorities had announced the enforcement of the “no payment of school fees, no examination” policy which already prohibits no fewer than 8,000 students of the institution. The examination started last Monday, and students who were unable to pay their tuition fees were forced to leave the examination halls.
Following the implementation of the controversial policy, scores of students of the school protested last Tuesday. The revolt caused heavy gridlock along the Ikwerre and Azikiwe Roads as the students marched from the university to the Rivers State Government House, chanting various solidarity songs.
The President of the Student Union Government of Rivers State University, Kelechi Omanu, reacted to the development in the media. He commended the university for doing its best in ensuring that all students got involved in academic activities. He, however, expressed displeasure that some students had owed the school for four years but pleaded with the school management to assist ease the policy.
In 2016, two students of the University of Port Harcourt (UNIPORT) were reportedly killed during a protest over a similar policy by the management of the institution that school fees must be paid before they would be authorised to take their first semester examinations. The UNIPORT students’ protest had halted academic and administrative activities in the school as they demanded that the then vice-chancellor, Prof. Sunday Lale, must address them and reverse the policy.
Undoubtedly, the economic hardships faced by all segments of Nigeria are taking their toll on schools as parents and students struggle hard to pay tuition fees. Nigerian universities are no exception, as they are not without their challenges. As with almost everything in the country, operating costs and expenses have doubled, so capital needs to be raised. Hence, we understand why the school insists on full payment of fees as a prerequisite for students to take the semester exams.
Regrettably, some students deliberately decline to pay tuition fees for the entire duration of their studies. We condemn this behaviour. Universities are not charity organisations. However, we impel the authorities to show sympathy for the indigent. Preventing defaulting students from taking exams, especially those in their final year, will certainly ensure that they automatically have an extra year and other students overstay on campus. Instead, they should be compelled to pay the fees before commencing clearance.
The governing council should act “in loco parentis” by showing compassion for the impecunious students and permitting them to sit for their examinations. They should likewise prevail on the vice-chancellor and the senate of the institution to reverse the “no school fees, no examination” policy to stave off an escalation of the students’ resistance to the scheme. The council must enforce compliance accordingly.
This issue has thrown up the need for the Rivers State governor, Chief Nyesom Wike, who is also the Visitor to the state-owned institution, to intervene. Such intervention should see to the outright jettisoning or fine-tuning of the controversial policy. There is a necessity to consider underprivileged students of the school who have been made so, especially by the unbearable economic catastrophe in the country.
Intervention by the local government councils of affected students will be a congenial idea. The councils can interface with the management of the university to take care of the school fees of genuine students of the institute with verifiable indigeneship across the local government areas. But, school fees should not be the only source of income for our universities. These are grossly inadequate and archaic.
Rivers State University can help by desisting from increasing tuition fees geometrically in these socially and economically difficult times. May we remind the school authorities that the founding fathers of the institution established it to close the educational gap in the state. This is why until recently the university was the cheapest in the country. It was deliberate to promote the education of poverty-stricken and indigenous people of the state.
The world has changed, and publicly-owned higher institutions must make strident efforts not to be left behind. For us to thrive in this new world, participate fully and productively in the new global economy and benefit from it rather than be consumed by the technological advancements that are transforming the globe, our tertiary education must be prepared to embrace reinvention and adapt to disruption.
In the face of the rising number of qualified students demanding higher education amid dwindling government revenue, Nigeria needs to review its model of funding higher institutions. Continued subsidisation of tuition fees is putting financial pressure on the government. A student loan scheme, which is a better model of financing higher education, maybe the way to go. It has been successfully used in South Africa, Kenya, and Ghana, and has recently become prominent in Rwanda and Uganda.
A university that condescends to the point of chasing and harassing students in the guise of school fees drive, does not live up to its name; it has sold its prestige. As one of the first state-owned universities in the country, RSU must have a more viable tuition payment policy for students.
Editorial
Strike: Heeding ASUU’s Demands
Editorial
Making Rivers’ Seaports Work
When Rivers State Governor, Sir Siminalayi Fubara, received the Board and Management of the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA), led by its Chairman, Senator Adeyeye Adedayo Clement, his message was unmistakable: Rivers’ seaports remain underutilised, and Nigeria is poorer for it. The governor’s lament was a sad reminder of how neglect and centralisation continue to choke the nation’s economic arteries.
The governor, in his remarks at Government House, Port Harcourt, expressed concern that the twin seaports — the NPA in Port Harcourt and the Onne Seaport — have not been operating at their full potential. He underscored that seaports are vital engines of national development, pointing out that no prosperous nation thrives without efficient ports and airports. His position aligns with global realities that maritime trade remains the backbone of industrial expansion and international commerce.
Indeed, the case of Rivers State is peculiar. It hosts two major ports strategically located along the Bonny River axis, yet cargo throughput has remained dismally low compared to Lagos. According to NPA’s 2023 statistics, Lagos ports (Apapa and Tin Can Island) handled over 75 per cent of Nigeria’s container traffic, while Onne managed less than 10 per cent. Such a lopsided distribution is neither efficient nor sustainable.
Governor Fubara rightly observed that the full capacity operation of Onne Port would be transformative. The area’s vast land mass and industrial potential make it ideal for ancillary businesses — warehousing, logistics, ship repair, and manufacturing. A revitalised Onne would attract investors, create jobs, and stimulate economic growth, not only in Rivers State but across the Niger Delta.
The multiplier effect cannot be overstated. The port’s expansion would boost clearing and forwarding services, strengthen local transport networks, and revitalise the moribund manufacturing sector. It would also expand opportunities for youth employment — a pressing concern in a state where unemployment reportedly hovers around 32 per cent, according to the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS).
Yet, the challenge lies not in capacity but in policy. For years, Nigeria’s maritime economy has been suffocated by excessive centralisation. Successive governments have prioritised Lagos at the expense of other viable ports, creating a traffic nightmare and logistical bottlenecks that cost importers and exporters billions annually. The governor’s call, therefore, is a plea for fairness and pragmatism.
Making Lagos the exclusive maritime gateway is counter productive. Congestion at Tin Can Island and Apapa has become legendary — ships often wait weeks to berth, while truck queues stretch for kilometres. The result is avoidable demurrage, product delays, and business frustration. A more decentralised port system would spread economic opportunities and reduce the burden on Lagos’ overstretched infrastructure.
Importers continue to face severe difficulties clearing goods in Lagos, with bureaucratic delays and poor road networks compounding their woes. The World Bank’s Doing Business Report estimates that Nigerian ports experience average clearance times of 20 days — compared to just 5 days in neighbouring Ghana. Such inefficiency undermines competitiveness and discourages foreign investment.
Worse still, goods transported from Lagos to other regions are often lost to accidents or criminal attacks along the nation’s perilous highways. Reports from the Federal Road Safety Corps indicate that over 5,000 road crashes involving heavy-duty trucks occurred in 2023, many en route from Lagos. By contrast, activating seaports in Rivers, Warri, and Calabar would shorten cargo routes and save lives.
The economic rationale is clear: making all seaports operational will create jobs, enhance trade efficiency, and boost national revenue. It will also help diversify economic activity away from the overburdened South West, spreading prosperity more evenly across the federation.
Decentralisation is both an economic strategy and an act of national renewal. When Onne, Warri, and Calabar ports operate optimally, hinterland states benefit through increased trade and infrastructure development. The federal purse, too, gains through taxes, duties, and improved productivity.
Tin Can Island, already bursting at the seams, exemplifies the perils of over-centralisation. Ships face berthing delays, containers stack up, and port users lose valuable hours navigating chaos. The result is higher operational costs and lower competitiveness. Allowing states like Rivers to fully harness their maritime assets would reverse this trend.
Compelling all importers to use Lagos ports is an anachronistic policy that stifles innovation and local enterprise. Nigeria cannot achieve its industrial ambitions by chaining its logistics system to one congested city. The path to prosperity lies in empowering every state to develop and utilise its natural advantages — and for Rivers, that means functional seaports.
Fubara’s call should not go unheeded. The Federal Government must embrace decentralisation as a strategic necessity for national growth. Making Rivers’ seaports work is not just about reviving dormant infrastructure; it is about unlocking the full maritime potential of a nation yearning for balance, productivity, and shared prosperity.
Editorial
Addressing The State Of Roads In PH
