By SANI IBN SALIHU
Introduction
In this follow-up to my earlier article on the need to abandon strikes as a tool for bargaining in Nigerian universities, I examine the recurring impasse between the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) and successive Nigerian governments since 1999. Despite numerous agreements aimed at improving university education, persistent strikes and inconsistent government implementation have hindered meaningful progress. This article analyses government efforts, structural challenges, and proposes a path towards a sustainable, strike-free future for higher education in Nigeria.
Government inertia, broken promises
The Nigerian government’s recurring failure to fully implement agreements with ASUU stems from a combination of political inertia, fiscal constraints, and a lack of political will to prioritise education. This has created a “depressing cycle of negotiations, strikes, and half-hearted interventions” since the 2009 FGN-ASUU Agreement.
ASUU argues that official indifference and years of broken promises are the root causes of the crisis. Successive administrations have formed renegotiation committees, such as the Wale Babalakin Committee in 2017 and the Nimi Briggs Committee in 2022, but have consistently failed to implement the recommendations. This pattern suggests a low priority for resolving the crisis permanently.
Additionally, bureaucratic inertia slows decision-making, while repeated reliance on multiple committees revisiting the same issues demonstrates a lack of urgency. ASUU also perceives the frequent invocation of the “no work, no pay” policy as coercion rather than thoughtful dialogue, undermining trust between stakeholders. Fiscal constraints and underfunding exacerbate the problem, while issues of affordability and constitutional purview limit the government’s capacity to fully meet ASUU’s demands.
Structural, legal gaps
Many agreements, including the 2019 Memorandum of Understanding, are criticised for limited scope and lack of enforceability, particularly regarding state universities. Contractual ambiguity—where some government officials claim documents are drafts rather than final agreements—further weakens enforceability.
To break this cycle, all future agreements must ensure legal enforceability and budgetary alignment. Final agreements should be gazetted with full involvement of the Ministry of Justice and the National Assembly to guarantee compliance. Funding commitments must be mainstreamed into annual budgets with predictable schedules for allowances, arrears, and revitalisation funds.
Holistic renegotiation of old agreements should focus not only on financial matters but also on structural reforms, accountability mechanisms, and inclusive policymaking. Both parties must engage sincerely, suspend punitive measures and observe a moratorium on strikes, with the National Assembly declaring an emergency on university education to enable uninterrupted implementation. Third-party mediators should be employed to bridge distrust, while legislative oversight ensures compliance.
Historical government efforts, lessons learned
Since 1999, successive administrations have made notable, albeit incomplete, contributions to university education:
Olusegun Obasanjo (1999–2007) – Expanded private-sector participation, conducted accreditation and ranking exercises and fought cultism. Frequent ASUU strikes, however, disrupted progress.
Umaru Musa Yar’Adua (2007–2010) – Focused on dialogue and Niger Delta educational programs. Tenure was short-lived but marked by engagement with ASUU.
Goodluck Jonathan (2010–2015) – Established 12 new federal universities, strengthened TETFund with over N500 billion and funded postgraduate studies for lecturers. Strikes persisted despite these interventions.
Muhammadu Buhari (2015–2023) – Created 37 new institutions, invested N1.702 trillion via TETFund, improved teacher welfare and introduced JAMB’s CAPS system. Nevertheless, ASUU lost 610 days to strikes, stalling progress.
Bola Ahmed Tinubu (2023–Present) – Introduced NELFUND interest-free student loans, invested N110 billion in medical education infrastructure and improved instructional quality. While ASUU has remained largely peaceful, cost-of-living pressures threaten sustainability.
Had the university system experienced strike-free years since 1999, the progress achieved by these administrations could have been unprecedented. This reality underscores my firm belief that strikes are no longer a viable solution to improving Nigerian university education.
Conclusion
A sustainable resolution requires government and ASUU to shift from a conflict-driven model to one anchored in long-term structural reform. Legal enforceability, budgetary alignment, holistic renegotiation, sincere engagement, third-party mediation and legislative oversight are critical to breaking the cycle.
The ultimate goal is a student-centred system where the beneficiaries of education, the students, are not overlooked in pursuit of administrative or welfare objectives. Nigerian university education can only become relevant in the 21st Century and beyond if both government and ASUU commit to a partnership rooted in accountability, transparency and structural reform, free from the recurring disruptions of strikes.
Salihu writes from Lafia, Nasarawa State