NELFUND Speaks on Publishing Names of Student Loan Beneficiaries

The Nigerian Education Loan Fund (NELFUND) has ruled out making public the names of students benefiting from its loan scheme, insisting that their identities must remain protected under data privacy regulations.

The Fund said it would continue to disclose the institutions receiving payments and the number of students benefiting from the programme but would not release personal details of individual borrowers.

NELFUND Director-General, Akintunde Sawyerr, explained that publishing the identities of beneficiaries could expose them to unnecessary embarrassment, discrimination and possible targeting because of their financial circumstances.

He maintained that accessing an educational loan should not become a source of public embarrassment for students, particularly those who depend on financial assistance to complete their studies.

Sawyerr made the clarification during an interview, where he addressed concerns surrounding transparency, loan repayment, the sustainability of the programme and the management of funds released to tertiary institutions.

The NELFUND boss was asked whether the organisation had considered publishing the names of beneficiaries to demonstrate transparency in the administration of the programme.

He responded, “No, certainly not. There are data protection issues. If you borrow money from an institution or you borrow money from me, you don’t want to see it on a notice board or to see it on television that you borrowed money from me.

“Some people are embarrassed by taking loans. Also, some people don’t want to be targeted, so we’re never going to publish the names of individual beneficiaries. We’ll tell you the schools that we paid; we can tell you the numbers, but the data protection laws prevent us from giving out the names of individuals who have taken loans.”

According to figures released by the fund, NELFUND has disbursed a total of N375.28 billion since the student loan application portal opened on May 24, 2024.

The amount, recorded as of Monday, November 9, 2026, comprises N194.77 billion paid towards institutional fees and N180.50 billion released as upkeep allowances to students.

The fund also disclosed that 1,675,474 student loans had been disbursed across 320 beneficiary institutions.

The figures represent the financial commitment made towards supporting students who might otherwise struggle to meet the cost of tertiary education.

However, questions have continued to emerge about how the programme will maintain its financial capacity as more students apply for assistance and existing beneficiaries approach the repayment stage.

Addressing concerns about whether the loans could eventually attract interest, Sawyerr said NELFUND had no immediate plan to introduce additional charges on the money borrowed by students.

He maintained that the government had adopted an interest-free arrangement to make the programme more accessible to Nigerians seeking higher education.

“At the moment, we have decided that we don’t want to have interest on the loans. When we consider it necessary to do that, we’ll have a discussion. It’s an interest-free loan. Nigerians deserve an interest-free loan,” he said.

The director-general also spoke against suggestions that the government should convert the student loans into grants that beneficiaries would not be required to repay.

He argued that students receiving financial support at the tertiary level were generally old enough to understand the responsibility attached to borrowing money.

According to him, the purpose of the programme is to help students acquire education and eventually secure employment or establish themselves financially.

He said beneficiaries should therefore be prepared to repay the money after completing their education and becoming financially independent.

“I understand that, at the end of the day, people only value things that they pay for, while just giving people money because it’s education, at the tertiary level.

“Most of the people we’re dealing with are adults, and these adults understand that they’re getting an education so they can make a living, and they’re quite happy to borrow in order to pay back.”

On the long-term financial strength of NELFUND, Sawyerr explained that the organisation would not depend entirely on repayments from beneficiaries to sustain its operations.

He identified investment returns, donations and government allocations as additional sources through which the fund could generate resources for future disbursements.

He also argued that expanding access to education would eventually benefit the country’s economy by increasing the number of skilled and employable Nigerians.

According to him, more educated young people entering the workforce could contribute to a wider tax base, providing the government with additional revenue to support education financing.

“Recovery is very important for the funds, but it’s not our only source of sustaining the NELFUND. We have other sources. We’re able to raise funds. We’re able to invest the funds that we have. We’re able to receive donations.

“But I think, most importantly, if we get our students, our youth, educated and empowered, there will be a larger tax base, more money will be collected from the taxation system, and it will be used, given the approach of this government, to fund education further, including NELFUND.”

Sawyerr further disclosed that some beneficiaries had already commenced repayment of their loans, while individuals and organisations had also expressed interest in supporting the scheme by paying the educational expenses of other students.

He maintained that Nigeria needed a broader approach to financing education rather than relying exclusively on money recovered from previous beneficiaries.

The NELFUND chief also addressed concerns about the legal framework governing the fund’s regular financing.

He explained that the organisation already receives statutory support through the development levy, which provides for a share of the revenue generated under the arrangement.

“We are already provided for in the development levy. We get 15 per cent of the four per cent in the development levy. That’s an amount of money that is shared amongst those who are entitled to it, including NELFUND. That has already been provided for,” he said.

Beyond funding and repayment, Sawyerr discussed changes introduced to the student loan payment process, particularly the tokenisation system designed to prevent mistakes and double payments of tuition fees.

He explained that NELFUND initially operated a system in which approved tuition fees were transferred directly to the accounts of beneficiary institutions, while students received separate payments to cover their upkeep expenses.

However, the arrangement sometimes created difficulties when students had already paid their tuition fees before the fund completed its disbursement to their institutions.

In such situations, payments could be duplicated, creating complications for both students and the receiving institutions.

Some beneficiaries also struggled to confirm whether their tuition payments had been processed, especially when examinations and other academic activities were approaching.

To address the problem, NELFUND introduced a tokenisation arrangement that gives students greater control over the final payment process.

Under the system, electronic payment tokens are sent to beneficiaries through an application on their mobile phones. Students can then authorise the payment of their approved fees to their respective institutions.

Sawyerr explained that the arrangement prevents beneficiaries from diverting the money to unrelated expenses because the payment can only be directed to the institution connected to their admission.

He said, “We decided to end that situation by using a token system where we send the electronic money to the student on an app, on their phone.

“They can now say, yes, I’m ready to pay my fees. They press the pay button, and it goes to one school only – the school they are attached to, or they’re admitted into. They cannot use that payment for anything else.

“But we put the control for the payment, the press pay button, in the hands of the students. And that’s what that tokenisation is about. It is to prevent or avoid double payments to the schools.”

The NELFUND director-general also addressed complaints about increases in tuition fees by some tertiary institutions following the introduction of the student loan programme.

He said the organisation had made it clear that it would not automatically finance excessive fee increases, adding that measures had been introduced to enable students to challenge disputed charges before applying for loans.

According to him, the fund has included a price dispute feature on its new application portal.

The facility allows students to examine the fees charged by their institutions and raise objections where they believe the amounts are unreasonable.

NELFUND would then receive the complaints and engage the affected institutions to resolve the issues.

Sawyerr said the arrangement was intended to discourage institutions from increasing their charges excessively in anticipation that the government-backed loan scheme would cover the additional costs.

He said, “Those who tried it, we made it very clear to them that if you increase your fees beyond a certain level, we will not fund it. I think we’re largely on top of it.

“We’ve also introduced something on our new portal, which is a price resolution or price dispute button where the student can look at the fees before they apply for the loan and dispute it.”

However, he clarified that NELFUND could not directly punish institutions over arbitrary fee increases because its establishing law did not give it such powers.

He explained that the organisation could refuse to finance disputed or excessive charges, but disciplinary action against institutions remained the responsibility of their respective regulatory bodies.

He identified the National Universities Commission, the National Board for Technical Education and the National Commission for Colleges of Education as agencies responsible for overseeing the institutions under their respective jurisdictions.

He said, “No, we cannot penalise the schools because we don’t have the power. That is not within the law. We, as NELFUND, all we can do is say we’re not going to give money.

“So, we’ll just have to negotiate and make sure that the regulatory authorities like the National Universities Commission and National Board for Technical Education and the National Commission for Colleges of Education are the ones who can do that.”