The Nigerian Education Loan Fund has said it will not make public the names of students benefiting from its loan scheme, citing data protection laws and concerns over exposing recipients to embarrassment or possible targeting.
The Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of NELFUND, Akintunde Sawyerr, said the agency would instead disclose the institutions receiving payments and the number of students benefiting from the scheme, while maintaining the confidentiality of individual borrowers.
Since the student loan portal was launched on May 24, 2024, the fund has disbursed N375.28bn as of Monday, November 9, 2026.
The amount comprises N194.77bn for institutional fees and N180.50bn for students’ upkeep allowances.
NELFUND also revealed that 1,675,474 student loans had been disbursed across 320 beneficiary institutions.
Speaking in an interview with The PUNCH, Sawyerr said publicly identifying students who borrowed money to finance their education could expose them to unnecessary stigma because of their financial circumstances.
The position comes amid calls from education and finance experts for increased transparency and accountability in the administration of the loan scheme, particularly over its long-term sustainability and repayment structure ahead of the first repayment window in 2028.
Asked whether the fund would consider publishing beneficiaries’ names to address transparency concerns, Sawyerr said, “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.”
On the possibility of introducing interest charges on the loans, the NELFUND chief said the agency had no immediate plans to do so, maintaining that students should be allowed to access interest-free financing.
“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.
Sawyerr also rejected suggestions that the loans should be converted into grants, arguing that students at the tertiary level were mature enough to understand the terms of borrowing and should repay after securing employment.
He said, “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.”
Addressing concerns about the financial sustainability of the scheme, Sawyerr said loan recovery was not the fund’s only source of revenue, noting that NELFUND could also rely on investments, donations and statutory funding.
He added that expanding access to education would increase the number of Nigerians contributing to the tax system, thereby generating more resources for education financing.
He said, “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.”
The NELFUND boss further disclosed that some beneficiaries had begun repaying their loans, while some Nigerians had expressed willingness to support the scheme by paying the educational expenses of other students.
He called for a comprehensive approach to funding education, saying the scheme should not depend exclusively on loan repayments for its survival.
On concerns about the lack of a clearly defined statutory funding arrangement, Sawyerr said the fund was already covered under the development levy.
“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.
The NELFUND chief also explained that the tokenisation system recently introduced by the agency was designed to eliminate double tuition payments and give students more control over the payment process.
He said the fund initially paid approved tuition fees directly to the accounts of beneficiary institutions, while upkeep allowances were transferred separately to students.
However, the arrangement sometimes led to duplicate payments when students had already settled their fees before the fund transferred the money to their institutions.
According to Sawyerr, some students also struggled to confirm the status of their tuition payments, particularly when facing examination deadlines and other academic requirements.
To address the problem, the agency introduced a system that sends electronic tokens to students’ phones, allowing them to authorise tuition payments to their respective institutions.
He explained that the tokens were restricted to the institutions where beneficiaries had secured admission, preventing the funds from being diverted.
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.”
Sawyerr also dismissed concerns over tuition fee increases by some universities and other tertiary institutions, saying NELFUND had made it clear that it would not support fees deemed excessive.
He said a price dispute feature had been added to the fund’s new portal, enabling students to challenge tuition charges before submitting loan applications.
According to him, complaints raised through the feature would be forwarded to NELFUND for discussions with the institutions concerned.
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 noted that NELFUND lacked the legal authority to sanction institutions over fee increases, adding that the agency could only withdraw its financial support, while regulatory bodies were responsible for disciplinary action.
He listed the National Universities Commission, the National Board for Technical Education and the National Commission for Colleges of Education as the agencies responsible for regulating the affected institutions.
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.”
