JAMB, INEC and the Heavy Burden of National Expectations

In Nigeria, we often demand excellence from our institutions without fully appreciating the daunting challenges they face.

Two bodies that regularly bear the brunt of this pressure are the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). Though their mandates differ, their struggles are deeply connected by one common thread: the complexity of executing large-scale national operations in an environment riddled with systemic challenges.

JAMB, which conducts entrance exams for prospective undergraduates, handles around 1.5 million candidates every year. It must coordinate computer-based testing across hundreds of centres nationwide, maintain the integrity of its questions and results, and manage technological failures, human error, and, sadly, exam malpractice.

Each year brings new glitches, new criticisms, and fresh calls for reform—yet few acknowledge the sheer difficulty of delivering a seamless operation under such conditions.

INEC faces an even more enormous task. With over 93 million registered voters, elections in Nigeria are a logistical behemoth. From ballot distribution to real-time result collation, the commission juggles multiple variables across thousands of locations, many of which are remote and inaccessible. The commission must also operate under high-stakes political pressure, often while navigating security threats, misinformation campaigns, and legal battles.

When JAMB delays results or cancels a test centre, the public backlash is immediate. When INEC postpones an election or encounters a technological hitch, outrage follows. Yet, rarely do we stop to consider the impossibility of perfection in a system built on weak infrastructure, erratic power supply, inconsistent internet access, and low public trust. It is easy to criticize from the sidelines; far harder to understand the terrain from within.

Interestingly, some of those who loudly berate JAMB and INEC have never managed even the smallest logistical task. They haven’t overseen a school PTA election or coordinated a community outreach.

Yet they expect two of the most complex public agencies in the country to operate with military precision in deeply imperfect conditions.

This is not an argument against accountability—JAMB and INEC must continually improve and answer for their shortcomings. But criticism without context is unhelpful. We must begin to see these institutions not as infallible giants, but as human systems doing difficult work in an unforgiving landscape.

If we truly want better performance, then we must also invest in the environments that shape outcomes: stronger infrastructure, better-trained personnel, and a civic culture that respects rules and procedures.

Until then, let’s temper our outrage with understanding and support the slow, often frustrating, but necessary work of building functional national systems.

JAMB and INEC are mirrors of our national complexity. To demand more from them, we must first demand more from ourselves.