1

UMEZURIKE EMEKA TAYE

Autonomy is not merely about freedom from gov­ernment interference; it is about granting universi­ties the authority to make academ­ic, financial, and administrative decisions that reflect their unique missions. For instance, universities should have the power to design market-relevant programs, manage their budgets, recruit according to need without or with very reduced political interference and set compet­itive conditions of service within na­tional guidelines. When institutions have the ability to innovate, they can more effectively collaborate with in­dustries, attract research funding, and respond to changing societal needs.

However, autonomy must go hand-in-hand with accountability. There must be proper oversight mechanisms, as financial or academ­ic independence without control or regulation could lead to inefficiency and corruption. The solution lies in a shared governance model where university councils, senates, and external stakeholders play clearly defined roles in ensuring transpar­ency while preserving institutional freedom. The introduction of perfor­mance-based funding, where univer­sities are rewarded for measurable outcomes such as research output, student success, and community en­gagement, can also strengthen both autonomy and accountability. There also must be periodic auditing of all university accounts by independent bodies set up by the government and reports be reviewed. In the event of misappropriation of funds, appro­priate sanction should be meted out and culprits should actually see and be kept within the four walls of a prison for such acts to serve as a deterrent.

Poor governance has long un­dermined the effectiveness of Ni­gerian public universities. Political interference in the appointment of vice-chancellors, opaque procure­ment and recruitment processes, and weak internal management structures have eroded institutional integrity. In some universities, deci­sion-making is mired in internal pol­itics, nepotism and patronage rather than merit or data-driven planning. The result is a leadership culture that prioritizes short-term survival and their ability to continue to stay in office over strategic development.

Effective governance in higher education demands visionary lead­ership, data-informed planning, and a strong culture of integrity. The Federal Government and university governing councils must establish transparent and merit-based pro­cesses for leadership recruitment. Similarly, internal management structures should prioritize evi­dence-based decision-making, fis­cal responsibility, and participatory administration.

The creation of independent reg­ulatory bodies separate from direct government ministries could en­hance oversight without microman­agement. For example, the National Universities Commission (NUC) should evolve from being a compli­ance monitor to a true quality-assur­ance and capacity-building agency, fostering innovation and supporting institutional growth across the coun­try. NUC should function more as a partner for capacity building and resource allocation and sharing (especially academic and human capital resource) rather than just for accreditation and setting up of universities.

To end the recurring cycle of ASUU strikes and restore stability to Nigeria’s university system, the country must adopt a comprehen­sive and sustainable reform agenda built on three fundamental pillars of consistent funding, genuine in­stitutional autonomy, and transpar­ent governance. In the short term, ASUU must also adopt a more stra­tegic and proactive approach in its engagement with the government. ASUU must find way to sponsor bills through the senate for legally binding framework, backed by an Act of the National Assembly and duly assented to by the President that enforces the implementation of all agreements such as earned allow­ances and other negotiated benefits between ASUU and the government. This would prevent the repeated pat­tern of new administrations disown­ing previously signed agreements.

Additionally, immediate infra­structural renewal is essential, supported by targeted intervention funds to upgrade learning and re­search facilities. Research and post­graduate training should receive increased funding and incentives from TETFund, as well as through private-sector and international partnerships, to reduce the ongoing brain drain and foster innovation within the country’s universities.

In the long term, Nigeria’s higher education system needs a restruc­tured financing model that blends sustained public funding such as through NELFUND with private investment and international col­laborations. Universities should be granted greater managerial au­tonomy to innovate, compete, and tailor their operations to global best practices. The National Universi­ties Commission (NUC) must also be strengthened to function not just as a regulator, but as a supportive partner that enhances institutional capacity and promotes quality as­surance. Transparency and account­ability should be institutionalized through annual public reporting of university finances, performance indicators, and outcomes.

The recurring ASUU strikes are only the visible surface of a deeper systemic dysfunction within Nige­ria’s public universities. At the core lie intertwined issues of inadequate funding, constrained autonomy, and poor governance. Addressing these structural failures requires moving beyond temporary palliatives and adopting a comprehensive, long-term strategy that redefines how Nigerian universities are funded, managed, and evaluated. If Nigeria truly aspires to transform its econo­my and compete globally, it must be­gin by transforming its universities. A stable, well-funded, autonomous, and responsibly governed higher ed­ucation system is not a luxury; it is the foundation of national progress. The future of Nigeria’s development depends on how seriously it takes the lessons beyond the ASUU strike.

*Concluded

*Emeka Taye (PhD) writes from the De­partment of Biological Sciences, Lead City University, Ibadan