The Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) has appealed a ruling by the Delta State High Court in Warri, which barred its minimum age policy for tertiary institution admissions. The court’s decision, delivered on October 16, 2024, by Justice Anthony O. Akpovi, declared JAMB’s 16-year age restriction unconstitutional, sparking a heated debate over equal access to education in Nigeria. JAMB, however, is not backing down, filing an appeal and requesting a stay of execution to maintain the status quo pending a higher court’s verdict.
The Court’s Landmark Decision
The legal tussle began when lawyer John Aikpokpo-Martins challenged JAMB’s policy, arguing that it infringed on candidates’ constitutional rights. Representing himself, Aikpokpo-Martins contended that barring candidates under 16 from university admissions violated sections 18(1) and 42 of the 1999 Constitution. Section 18(1) guarantees equal educational opportunities for all Nigerians, while section 42 prohibits discrimination based on arbitrary factors, including age. The court agreed, ruling that JAMB’s directive, issued on October 16, 2024, mandating that only candidates turning 16 by August 31, 2025, be admitted was discriminatory and unconstitutional.
Justice Akpovi’s judgment went further, nullifying the policy entirely and issuing an injunction against JAMB and all Nigerian universities. The court ordered that all qualified candidates, regardless of their date of birth, be admitted provided they meet other academic requirements. This ruling effectively dismantled JAMB’s age-based admission framework, opening the door for younger candidates to pursue tertiary education without delay.
JAMB’s Defense and Appeal
JAMB, represented by counsel A. O. Mohammed, mounted a spirited defense during the proceedings. Mohammed argued that section 18(1) falls under Chapter 2 of the Constitution, which outlines the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy provisions widely considered non-justiciable, or unenforceable, in court. However, Aikpokpo-Martins countered that when paired with section 42, a justiciable right against discrimination, the policy’s age restriction became legally challengeable. The court sided with the plaintiff, setting the stage for JAMB’s appeal.
Fabian Benjamin, JAMB’s Head of Public Affairs and Protocol, confirmed the board’s next steps in a statement on Friday. “We have filed an appeal against the High Court ruling and sought a stay of execution,” Benjamin said. This means the 16-year minimum age requirement remains in effect until the appellate courts weigh in. JAMB has also maintained that its policy accommodates“ exceptionally brilliant” candidates under 16, allowing them to sit for the Unified Tertiary Matriculation Examination (UTME) despite the age cap.
A Policy in Flux: Ministerial Shifts and Public Backlash
The age restriction saga traces back to July 2024, when then-Minister of Education Tahir Mamman set 18 as the minimum age for university admissions. The decision drew widespread criticism from parents, students, and education stakeholders, who argued it unfairly penalized younger, high-achieving candidates. Following Mamman’s removal from office, his successor, Tunji Alausa, reversed the policy, lowering the minimum age to 16. JAMB aligned with this directive, issuing its October 2024 circular to enforce the new threshold.
However, the board clarified that under normal protocols, candidates below 16 would still be ineligible for the UTME or admission, except in exceptional cases of academic brilliance. This nuance did little to quell the controversy, as critics like Aikpokpo-Martins argued it still excluded qualified candidates based solely on their birth year, a criterion they deemed arbitrary and unjust.
Implications for Nigerian Education
The Delta State High Court’s ruling has far-reaching implications for Nigeria’s education system. By striking down the age restriction, the court reaffirmed the principle of equal opportunity enshrined in the Constitution, potentially paving the way for younger students to enter universities sooner. For many, this is a victory for meritocracy, ensuring that academic ability, not chronological age determines access to higher education.
Yet, JAMB’s appeal signals that the battle is far from over. If the stay of execution is granted and the appellate courts uphold the board’s position, the 16-year minimum could remain in place, leaving younger candidates in limbo. Education observers are closely watching the case, which could set a precedent for how constitutional rights intersect with administrative policies in Nigeria.
What Happens Next?
The standoff between JAMB and the judiciary remains unresolved. The board’s request for a stay of execution keeps the 16-year age policy operational for now, but the outcome of its appeal will ultimately determine the fate of countless students. Meanwhile, universities have been thrust into a legal gray area, caught between the court’s injunction and JAMB’s insistence on enforcing the age limit.
For John Aikpokpo-Martins, the fight is a personal and principled one. “This policy denied qualified candidates their rights based on an irrelevant factor,” he told PUNCH Online. “The Constitution is clear, education should be accessible to all, without discrimination.” As the case moves to higher courts, Nigeria’s education stakeholders await a definitive ruling that could reshape tertiary admissions for years to come.
