The Pacesetter Frontier Magazine

Tag: Sebastine Okafor

  • When Teachers Help Students Cheat: The Silent Collapse of Exam Integrity in South East Schools

    When Teachers Help Students Cheat: The Silent Collapse of Exam Integrity in South East Schools

    By Okafor Sebastine Chukwuebuka

    Recently, through friends and allies, I acquired some electronic devices designed to help curb examination malpractices across schools—both secondary and tertiary institutions. Ironically, the invention of artificial intelligence, which ought to aid learning, has worsened the situation. Some students now snap their question papers, upload them to AI-enabled platforms, and use the answers to write their exams.

    This problem is not limited to a particular school. It exists in almost every school I have recently visited—especially public institutions. During examinations, some staff members go as far as aiding these illegal acts, sometimes using physical and emotional blackmail. I have visited schools in Ebonyi, Enugu, and Anambra States in recent times, and what I witnessed was deeply troubling. Senior lecturers, Heads of Departments, and even proprietors go out of their way to protect students caught in malpractice. In some places, staff are allowed to collect as little as ₦1,000 per student to “look away” during exams. That is the sad reality.

    From the experiences gathered so far, there seems to be a widespread culture of aiding and abetting examination malpractice in educational institutions – particularly in Secondary and Tertiary institutions.

    Suffice it to state that some of the departments of Tertiary institutions are filled with personnel who seem to have lost touch with what academic integrity means. They shield their students under the excuse of: “Hapụ nụ ụmụaka ka ha dee exam [Allow these students to write their exams]; you cannot save Nigeria.” Some institutions go as far as creating Examination Malpractice Marshals, but instruct them never to penalize students. Imagine catching a student using AI to write an exam, confiscating the phone, and still allowing the student to continue without even issuing a new answer script. Consider the message this sends to other students in the hall.

    To make things worse, during one of our recent visits to a university in the South East, a Head of Department in Political Science was caught on camera instructing students to physically attack any invigilator—internal or external—who attempted to collect their phones during exams. That individual is an Associate Professor, and it is disturbing to imagine what he is teaching beyond the classroom.

    In many schools, principals even pay money to handpick invigilators for external exams. Once these compromised invigilators destroy the moral fibre of the students placed under their care, some university lecturers complete the damage by ignoring ethics entirely.

    Thankfully, not all institutions are the same. Godfrey Okoye University and Coal City University have maintained zero tolerance for malpractice. These schools have functional CCTV cameras in their examination halls, well-trained and adequate invigilators, and network-jamming devices that make cheating with mobile phones nearly impossible. Meanwhile, in many public schools, only two invigilators are assigned to monitor over 280 students in a hall where seven students sit in a single row. This makes the malpractice even easier.

    There are also institutions with good leadership but poorly motivated or compromised staff who make genuine reform impossible. Examples include ESUT, IMT, UNN, and FUNAI. These schools show signs of readiness to fight the problem but are still trapped by internal sabotage and negligence.

    This situation contributes greatly to the quality of graduates produced. Many companies today are hesitant to recruit despite the abundance of graduates with excellent results. The truth is, many of these so-called “first-class” and “second-class upper” graduates cannot meet basic workplace expectations because their grades are not a true reflection of their competence.

    It is time to borrow a leaf from our brothers in the South West, who have shown better commitment to discipline and transparency during examinations. If we are truly interested in raising thinkers, creators and honest citizens, we must rise to protect the credibility of our education system—regardless of whose name is involved.

  • Of Southeast Governors and the Rarely Issued Certificate of Occupancy

    Of Southeast Governors and the Rarely Issued Certificate of Occupancy

    By Sebastine Chukwuebuka Okafor 

    The Land Use Act of 1978 placed all lands in every state under the control of the governor, who holds the land in trust for the people. According to the law, anyone who occupies land in Nigeria must do so with the permission of the governor, and that permission is confirmed through a document known as a Certificate of Occupancy, often called a C of O. This document is supposed to be the legal proof that a person has the right to occupy and use a particular piece of land for a number of years—usually 99.

    In the South East region, it is difficult to find people who have genuine Certificates of Occupancy. Even those who try to get it are often discouraged by the long and frustrating process. From Enugu to Abia, Anambra to Ebonyi and Imo, the story is the same—applications stay unattended to for months, sometimes years, and in many cases, they never get approved.

    One of the major reasons behind this delay is the heavy bureaucratic process surrounding land administration in the region. Offices responsible for land matters are often disorganized, with files moving from one desk to another without any sense of urgency. There is little use of technology to track applications, and many of the processes still rely on manual documentation.

    What makes it worse is that several approvals must pass through the office of the governor, and unless there is a personal connection or political interest involved, the process simply stalls.

    There is also the issue of money. In many cases, land applicants are made to pay several fees—application fees, inspection fees, survey approvals, ground rent, and processing charges. Even after all these are paid, there is no guarantee that the C of O will be issued. Some are told unofficially that they must “settle” certain individuals before anything can move forward. This type of exploitation has discouraged honest land users from even starting the process at all.

    Another problem is tied to politics. Land in the South East is not just property—it is seen as power. There are cases where governments deliberately hold back the issuance of Certificates of Occupancy to keep control over certain lands. These lands are later given out quietly to political allies or influential individuals. In some communities, the lands that should be processed and titled for the benefit of the people end up in the hands of those who know how to play the political game.

    It is also important to mention the strong presence of customary land ownership in the region. Many families and communities still operate under traditional landholding systems. In such places, land is inherited and passed down from generation to generation without any formal documents. People do not see the need to go through government procedures because they believe their family history is enough to prove ownership. This belief has created a gap between what the law requires and what people are willing to do. As a result, many governors avoid pushing for full implementation of the land laws so as not to offend traditional institutions.

    Another reason for the low number of issued C of Os is the fear of legal commitment. Once a Certificate of Occupancy is signed, it becomes a binding document. The state cannot revoke it easily. Some governors prefer not to issue them at all so that they can always have the option of reclaiming the land in the future, especially when disputes or government projects arise.

    Many states in the South West have made efforts to reform their land systems by embracing technology, simplifying procedures, and cutting down corruption. In the South East, however, land matters are still trapped in old systems, personal interests, and administrative negligence.

    Until land administration is given proper attention in the South East, the people will continue to suffer. Without proper documentation, investors will remain hesitant, land disputes will increase, and the region will find it difficult to attract meaningful development. A Certificate of Occupancy should not be a favour or a privilege. It should be a right for every qualified land user who follows due process. That is how to build confidence, structure, and a better future.