TETFund, Private Universities, and Theory of Rights Deprivation - Ola Olateju

                                                                          Political Panorama Issue No 5

Welcome to the Monday edition of Political Panorama with Ola Olateju, where we dissect pressing political and governance issues with intellectual rigor. Today, we focus on the exclusion of private universities from TETFund support, a policy that raises serious concerns about fairness, institutional discrimination, and national development. Applying the Theory of Rights Deprivation, I argue that this exclusion is unconstitutional, unjust, and counterproductive to Nigeria’s education and economic progress.

Education as a Public Good and the Role of Private Institutions

Political theorists, from John Locke to John Stuart Mill, have long established that education is a public good and a critical driver of national development. In his work Democracy and Education (1916), John Dewey emphasized that education should be treated as a fundamental investment in the collective progress of a society, not merely as a privilege limited to state-run institutions.

In Nigeria, the state has institutionalized education support through the Tertiary Education Trust Fund (TETFund). However, despite its national relevance, TETFund restricts financial assistance exclusively to public universities, denying private universities access to essential research grants, faculty development funding, and infrastructural support. This policy disregards the constitutional rights of Nigerian citizens studying and working in private universities and contradicts the logic of education as a national rather than a sectoral investment.

Tertiary Education Trust Fund

Theory of Rights Deprivation and Constitutional Mandate to Protect Nigerian Citizens

The Theory of Rights Deprivation in political sociology posits that when certain groups or institutions are systematically denied access to critical resources, they suffer structural disadvantages that undermine their full participation in national development (Marshall, 1950). In the case of private universities, this exclusion disproportionately affects Nigerian students and faculty, who are the ultimate beneficiaries of educational funding.

The Nigerian 1999 Constitution (as amended) provides explicit protections for education as a fundamental responsibility of the state:

Section 18(1) mandates that “government shall direct its policy towards ensuring that there are equal and adequate educational opportunities at all levels.”

Section 17(3)(a) states that “the state shall direct its policy towards ensuring that all citizens, without discrimination, have the opportunity to secure adequate means of livelihood as well as adequate educational opportunities.”

By denying private universities access to TETFund support, the government indirectly deprives Nigerian citizens—students, lecturers, and researchers—of educational opportunities and professional development, violating the principles of equal access enshrined in the Constitution. The rights of these citizens should not be determined by whether they study or work in a public or private institution.

  

Dr Tunji Alausa.
Hon Minister of Education

The Question of Funding Source: Justifying Equal Access

One of the most indefensible aspects of the exclusion of private universities is the source of TETFund’s funding. The Fund is financed through a 2% education tax levied on all registered companies in Nigeria, including those that provide financial support to private universities. This raises a fundamental ethical and economic contradiction—private universities contribute indirectly to the TETFund pool, yet they are arbitrarily excluded from benefiting from it.

Political philosopher Robert Nozick (1974) argues in Anarchy, State, and Utopia that taxation without proportional benefit amounts to an unjust redistribution of resources. If private universities are expected to operate within the same national education framework as public institutions, they should not be systematically denied access to public funds that support higher education.

Private Universities as a Critical Pillar of National Development

Another flawed assumption underlying the exclusion of private universities is the belief that they are “elitist” institutions serving only privileged students. This notion is not only outdated but also contradicts empirical data on Nigeria’s higher education crisis.

According to JAMB admission statistics (2022), over 1.8 million candidates apply for university admission annually, yet public universities can only absorb about 600,000. Without private universities, over 1.2 million Nigerian youths would be left stranded in the admission process, increasing unemployment and social frustration.

Prot Omolola Irinoye
Vice Chancellor, Achievers University

Private universities help mop up excess demand, reducing the strain on public institutions and allowing the government to focus resources more efficiently.

Similarly, private universities have contributed significantly to job creation in the education sector, employing thousands of lecturers, administrative staff, and support personnel who would otherwise be job-seeking burdens on the state.

Addressing the Misconception of Private University Exclusivity

The claim that private universities do not deserve government support because they charge tuition fees is illogical. Many federal and state universities also charge high fees for postgraduate programs, diploma courses, and part-time studies. Moreover, several private universities operate non-profit models, with scholarship programs and subsidized tuition fees to accommodate economically disadvantaged students (Okebukola, 2021).

Hon Aminu Bello Masari
TETFund Board Chairman

If financial exclusivity were the basis for exclusion, then fee-paying programs in public universities should also be denied TETFund support. The reality is that public and private universities both serve national interests and should not be pitted against each other in resource allocation.

The Need for Policy Reform to Promote Inclusive Development

Given the glaring inequity in the current policy, Nigeria must restructure TETFund to include accredited private universities under a needs-based allocation model. A tiered support system could be developed, focusing on:

1. Research Grants – Faculty in private universities should have access to competitive research funding.

2. Infrastructure Support – Private universities meeting specific criteria could receive targeted infrastructure grants.

3. Faculty Development Programs – Lecturers in private institutions should be eligible for TETFund-sponsored training and international research exposure.

Such reforms align with global best practices. In countries like South Africa and Ghana, private universities benefit from state-supported research and faculty training programs (Teferra, 2018). If Nigeria aspires to build a globally competitive education system, it cannot afford a policy of exclusion and discrimination.

Conclusion

The exclusion of private universities from TETFund support violates the principles of fairness, national interest, and constitutional rights. By applying the Theory of Rights Deprivation, we see that this policy structurally disadvantages private institutions, thereby depriving Nigerian students and lecturers of opportunities for academic and professional development.

Moreover, the constitutional provisions for equal educational access demand that policies like TETFund be restructured to be more inclusive. Private universities play a crucial role in absorbing excess admission demand, creating jobs, and advancing national development, and they should not be sidelined in government funding allocations.

Nigeria needs a policy shift that recognizes all accredited universities as legitimate stakeholders in national education. If education is truly the key to development, then its funding mechanisms must reflect fairness, inclusivity, and strategic national interest.

What are your thoughts? Should private universities continue to be excluded from TETFund, or is it time for a fairer, more inclusive approach? Share your views, and let’s continue this critical conversation.

                                                                            www.politicalpanorama.com.ng