The Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) has come under scrutiny by the National Assembly Joint Committee on Finance over its expenditure in the 2024 fiscal year, which included N1.1 billion on meals and refreshments, and N850 million on security, cleaning, and fumigation.
During a budget defense session on Monday, JAMB Registrar, Prof. Ishaq Oloyede, presented the board’s 2025 budget proposal to the joint committee of the Senate and House of Representatives.
However, the presentation was met with strong criticism, particularly from Senator Adams Oshiomhole (APC, Edo North), who questioned the justification for the “excessive spending.”
Oshiomhole condemned the N1.1 billion spent on meals and refreshments, stating:
“You spent N1.1 billion on meals and refreshments. Are you being freely fed by the government? What this means is that you are spending the money you generate from poor students, many of them orphans.”
The senator also raised concerns about the N850 million allocated for cleaning, fumigation, and security services, sarcastically asking:
“What did you fumigate? Is it mosquitoes that took all this money?”
Further compounding the criticism, Oshiomhole questioned JAMB’s spending of N600 million on domestic travel, suggesting a pattern of financial mismanagement.
The committee also raised the issue of federal funding to JAMB despite the board’s status as a self-sufficient revenue-generating agency.
House Committee on Finance Chairman, Abiodun Faleke, queried why JAMB had received a N6 billion grant from the federal government in 2024 despite already remitting N4 billion to the Consolidated Revenue Fund.
Faleke challenged JAMB’s reliance on public funds, stating:
“You received N6 billion from the federal government after sending N4 billion. Why should an organization that generates its own revenue still rely on federal funding?”
The committee further threatened to recommend a halt to JAMB’s federal funding in the 2025 budget, urging the board to explain its financial decisions and account for the controversial spending.