The Nigerian Education Loan Fund has ruled out publishing the names of students benefiting from its loan scheme, citing data protection concerns and the need to protect beneficiaries from embarrassment and possible targeting.
The Director-General of NELFUND, Akintunde Sawyerr, said the fund would only disclose the institutions that received payments and the number of beneficiaries, insisting that the identities of individual students would remain confidential.
Since the launch of the student loan portal on May 24, 2024, NELFUND has disbursed a total of N375.28bn as of Monday, November 9, 2026, comprising N194.77bn in institutional fees and N180.50bn in upkeep allowances.
The fund also disclosed that 1,675,474 student loans had been disbursed across 320 beneficiary institutions.
Sawyerr, who spoke in an interview with The , argued that students who borrowed money to finance their education should not be exposed publicly because of their financial circumstances.
The position comes amid calls by education and finance experts for greater transparency and accountability in the administration of the student loan scheme, particularly as concerns mount over its long-term sustainability and recovery mechanisms ahead of the first repayment window in 2028.
Asked if NELFUND considered disclosing the names of beneficiaries in response to calls for transparency in its disbursement, Akintunde 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.”
On whether the loans should attract interest, at some point, Sawyerr said NELFUND had no immediate plans to charge interest, insisting that Nigerian students deserved interest-free loans.
“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 downplayed calls for conversion of the loans into grants, arguing that beneficiaries at the tertiary education level understood the financial implications of borrowing and should be prepared to 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.”
On concerns about the sustainability of the fund, Sawyerr said loan recovery was only one of several sources of financing available to NELFUND, adding that the fund could also generate revenue through investments, donations and statutory allocations.
He argued that educating more young Nigerians would eventually expand the country’s tax base and provide additional resources for funding education.
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 disclosed that some beneficiaries had already started repaying their loans, while several Nigerians had indicated interest in supporting the fund by paying the fees of other students.
He said the government should adopt a holistic approach to education financing rather than depend solely on loan repayments to sustain the scheme.
On the concerns raised by experts about the absence of a clear statutory funding arrangement, Sawyerr maintained that NELFUND 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.
Meanwhile, the NELFUND DG explained that the recently introduced tokenisation system was to prevent double payments of tuition fees and give students greater control over the payment process.
He said the scheme initially operated by paying approved tuition fees directly into the accounts of institutions, while separate funds were provided to beneficiaries for upkeep.
However, he explained that the arrangement sometimes resulted in double payments where students had already paid their fees before NELFUND released the money to their institutions.
He added that some beneficiaries also encountered difficulties confirming whether their fees had been paid, particularly when they needed to meet examination and other academic deadlines.
To address the challenges, Sawyerr said NELFUND introduced the system through which students receive electronic tokens on their phones and authorise payments to their respective institutions.
He said the tokens could only be used to pay the institution to which the beneficiary had been admitted, preventing diversion of the money to other purposes.
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 about tuition fee increases by some institutions, saying NELFUND had made it clear that it would not finance fees considered excessive.
He disclosed that the fund had introduced a price dispute feature on its new portal, allowing students to challenge fees before applying for loans.
He said the complaints would be forwarded to NELFUND for engagement with the affected institutions.
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 said NELFUND lacked the legal authority to penalise institutions that increased their fees, explaining that the fund could only withdraw financial support while relevant regulatory agencies handled disciplinary measures.
He identified 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 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.”