(A Nigerian NewsLeader Editorial, Sunday, October 25, 2026)
There is a disturbing injustice in Nigeria's employment system that has persisted for long, and which has grown worse in recent years.
It is the ugly practice in a federation where public recruitment has become an inheritance of privileged individuals and families and a marketplace for the highest bidders. The job placements have become exclusives for only the well connected, the rich and essentially for citizens of a particular ethnic groups in the country.
In this corrupt arrangement which is systematically stealing Nigeria's future, young high school leavers and graduates especially, have no hope of being recruited on merit basis into the civil service system except through favouritism, nepotic practice of man-know-man, bribe-for-job or by being priviledged or well connected by birth, by association or by recommendation. This unfortunate development deserves urgent national intervention to halt the trend.
For millions of qualified young Nigerians, obtaining a government job is no longer simply a matter of possessing the required academic qualifications or demonstrating competence and passing a competitive recruitment exercise. Increasingly, the perception is that applicants must know somebody who knows somebody, or must come from a privileged family or secure the intervention of a powerful politician or personality, or pay substantial bribes in local currency or even in dollars to people who control access to employment.
For others, the doors appear permanently closed because they lack the money, the connections and influential relatives needed to compete in a system that should offer equal opportunities to all citizens.
Even more troubling are allegations and documented instances of public institutions bypassing established recruitment procedures, with positions reportedly handed to friends, relatives, lovers (girl friends and boy friends) and associates of influential officials or board members and governing council of government agencies and parastatals. Such jobs are not secured by merit or competence or through a competitive exercise.
Noteworthy, is the fact that such job recruits, ordinarily, are most undeserving of the "arrangee" employment slots. Given a fair competitive bidding, they absolutely stand no chance to get the job. The result, often, is that they are the most unserious, the truants and most incompetent on the job and in the work place. Some of them use extraneous methods to rise on the job. Most of the females among them employ the well known factor called "bottom power" to "sleep" their way to the top rung of the job ladder. Many of them easily engage in official sleaze and can't even pass promotional tests or exams.
There have also been reports of retiring government officials being replaced through arrangements involving their children, close relatives and personal networks rather than transparent, competitive recruitment. This is not merely an employment problem. It is a question of justice, national unity, public-sector integrity and Nigeria's economic future.
Indeed, no citizen should need a godfather, a bribe or a privileged surname to obtain a job for which he or she is qualified. Public employment actually should be governed by merit, fairness, transparency and the law.
Presently, Nigeria's recruitment problem is not a matter of public perception. Official research provides disturbing evidence of the scale of the challenge.
A 2024 report on patterns and trends of corruption in Nigeria produced through collaboration between the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), examined corruption experiences during 2023 and compared them with findings from 2019. Among successful applicants recruited into the public sector between November 2020 and October 2023, the report found that approximately 60 per cent had used bribery, nepotism or both to improve their chances of securing employment.
An alarming breakdown shows that 27 per cent reported relying on bribery alone, while
13 per cent also reported relying on nepotism to secure their employments. 19 per cent however admitted using both bribery and nepotism to get jobs, while only
40 per cent used neither practice to gain job slots. These figures describe reported experiences among successful applicants, and not the proportion of every Nigerian public servant recruited corruptly.
Nevertheless, they expose a serious weakness in the integrity of public-sector recruitment. The same survey found that 46 per cent of successful public-sector applicants reported paying a bribe to facilitate recruitment, compared with 31 per cent in 2019. It also found that 32 per cent had received assistance from friends or relatives. The figures reveal a troubling combination that some applicants reportedly need both money and connections to secure positions that should be awarded through a fair and transparent process.
The research also identified a relationship between recruitment procedures and corruption. Among successful applicants who underwent a written examination or oral interview, 41 per cent reportedly used bribery or nepotism. The corresponding figure among those who were not formally assessed was 53 per cent.
However, these findings ordinarily should provoke an urgent response from the government of the federation, state governments, anti-corruption agencies and public-service regulators. The findings suggest that Nigeria's recruitment difficulties are not isolated administrative irregularities but part of a wider institutional problem.
Although this practice has existed for too long in Nigeria, it is difficult to identify a single year in which employment-related nepotism began. Indeed, it is an evil and retrogressive culture that has outlived successive governments in Nigeria.
Informal patronage, favouritism and personal influence have existed in different forms throughout the country's political and administrative history. Their persistence across successive civilian and military administrations suggests that the problem has become embedded in parts of the public sector.
Following the independence in 1960, Nigeria inherited a civil service influenced by the administrative structures of British colonial rule. Subsequent governments expanded public institutions, created new agencies and used public employment as an instrument of administration, political patronage and national integration.
The introduction of quota system arrangements before the independence, initially associated with recruitment into the armed forces, reflected concerns about unequal regional representation. The federal-character principle subsequently gained constitutional recognition in 1979. The return to civilian government in 1999 did not eliminate the underlying tension between merit, political patronage and equitable representation.
The problem, however, has become more conspicuous in an environment characterised by a rapidly expanding population, intense competition for secure employment, economic hardship and growing public demand for accountability.
Digital recruitment portals have made it much easier to announce vacancies and receive applications. Yet technology cannot guarantee fairness when those responsible for screening applications, conducting interviews or approving appointments can manipulate the whole process.
A recruitment exercise advertised publicly can still be compromised if successful candidates are predetermined before the advertisement appears. The challenge, therefore, is not merely to publish vacancies but to ensure that the entire process, from the announcement of a vacancy to the issuance of appointment letters, is open to independent examination.
.
Nigeria's federal structure makes fairness in public employment particularly important.
The country comprises 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, with a population drawn from numerous ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious communities. Federal institutions are expected to serve this diverse population rather than become the exclusive preserve of a handful of privileged families, regions or social groups.
Section 14(3) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, provides that the composition of the Federal Government and its agencies must reflect Nigeria's federal character principle and promote national unity, ensuring that no few states or ethnic, sectional or other groups predominate.
And Section 14(4) extends the principle of diversity and inclusion to state and local governments and their agencies. The Federal Character Commission (FCC) established under Decree No. 34 of 1996 before its recognition under the 1999 Constitution, is responsible for promoting, monitoring and enforcing compliance with the equity principle.
Paragraph 8 of Part I, Section C, of the Third Schedule to the Constitution sets out the Commission's responsibilities concerning the equitable distribution of public-service positions.
The Federal Character has been a constitutional promise under threat. The
Commission's Act further empowers the Commission to establish guidelines, monitor compliance and take legal measures against violations within its jurisdiction. This principle is certainly not an excuse to abandon merit, nor does it mean that an unqualified applicant must be appointed merely because of geographical origin. Its purpose is to ensure that qualified Nigerians from different parts of the country have a fair opportunity to compete for public positions, and that recruitment outcomes do not perpetuate regional exclusion.
The Federal character is designed to broaden access to opportunity, and indeed should serve that purpose and not to legitimise political favouritism or provide cover for the appointment of unqualified relatives, associates and personnel. A qualified candidate from a less influential state should not lose an opportunity to an unqualified candidate whose family has access to the corridors of power. Such qualified applicant equally should not be excluded simply because powerful interests have already decided who will occupy the available positions.
Nigeria's unity depends partly on citizens believing that their country belongs to them equally. When public employment becomes the private property of privileged groups, the constitutional promise of belonging is weakened.
The Federal Character Commission's published recruitment procedures contain safeguards designed to prevent precisely the abuses that Nigerians frequently complain about. Under its guidelines for federal public-service recruitment, vacancies are to be identified through proper manpower planning and advertised in at least two newspapers circulating nationally, with applicants ordinarily given a minimum of six weeks to apply.
The procedures require clear job descriptions, appropriate qualifications and equitable distribution of vacancies in accordance with existing representation. They also state that government agents must not demand application or processing fees from public-service applicants. And that
recruitment must not be contracted out to consulting firms, although designated public institutions may be engaged to organise screening exercises and aptitude tests.
The guidelines further provide for the involvement of the Federal Character Commission in monitoring recruitment and for a Certificate of Compliance before appointment letters are released under the specified federal procedures. These safeguards are not decorative administrative instructions but are intended to make recruitment open, orderly and accountable.
The Commission's published procedures also state that recruitment conducted without the required advertisement and observance of applicable guidelines may constitute an offence under the Federal Character Commission Act. Yet, the significant question is how effectively are these rules enforced?
The existence of guidelines is meaningless if an agency can quietly recruit through informal arrangements or manipulate a shortlist, or conceal vacancies or even issue appointment letters without satisfying the applicable requirements. It still boils down to the federal government moving beyond occasional warnings and establish credible systems for detecting, investigating and punishing violations.
State governments also need to strengthen their recruitment procedures, particularly where appointments are controlled by the state civil service commissions, local government authorities and politically influential office holders.
A particularly instructive example emerged in December 2022, when The Punch newspaper reported that the Federal Government had threatened sanctions against ministries, departments and agencies of government allegedly involved in backdoor recruitment.
The report identified the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) now renamed Nigeria Revenue Service (NRS), the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL), the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and the Nigeria Customs Service (NCS) among the institutions facing scrutiny over recruitment irregularities.
According to the report, some agencies had issued employment letters that were not accredited through the relevant federal civil-service authorities, while other reported cases involved replacing retired or deceased officials with children, family members and friends. These were reported allegations and findings that required appropriate administrative investigation.
Nevertheless, the report exposed a serious institutional vulnerability. The NNPC, the Central Bank of Nigeria and other major public institutions manage responsibilities and resources of national importance. Their recruitment systems should be models of professionalism, competence and accountability. They should not become employment markets in which applicants must establish personal relationships with senior officials before their applications receive meaningful consideration.
The allegation that some retiring officials arrange employment for their children or relatives is particularly disturbing.
Retirement creates a vacancy that belongs to the institution, not to the outgoing official. The position statutorily should be filled according to the applicable recruitment rules, staffing requirements and qualification standards. No retiring director, permanent secretary, general manager or other senior officer should have the power to reserve a position for a child, spouse, sibling or other relative simply because of the official's status.
Where a relative independently applies, satisfies the requirements and emerges successfully from a properly conducted recruitment exercise, the appointment is a different matter. Family relationships alone do not establish wrongdoing. The real offence lies in manipulating the process, displacing more qualified candidates, concealing vacancies or using official influence to secure an unfair advantage.
A public institution cannot become a family inheritance.
Another disturbing practice is the alleged demand for substantial sums of money from prospective applicants by recruitment panel members, intermediaries and other individuals claiming to have access to government employment. The sordid practice of involving bribery in the job recruitment exercise reduces employment to a commodity to be purchased.
Desperate graduates may be told that a particular amount will secure a place on a shortlist, guarantee success at an interview or ensure that an appointment letter is issued. Some of these vulnerable and desperate applicants may borrow money, sell personal or family property or exhaust family savings in the hope of obtaining the job. Others may fall victim to impostors who collect money without having any influence over the recruitment exercise.
The official prohibition on application and processing fees in federal public-service recruitment, especially, is therefore important. Applicants should not be deceived into believing that paying a recruitment panel member or an unofficial intermediary is a legitimate condition for employment. Bribery also creates a dangerous cycle. An individual who spends heavily to secure an appointment may subsequently attempt to recover that expenditure through corrupt practices, illicit payments or the abuse of official authority.
This outcome is not inevitable, but it is a foreseeable risk when employment is treated as an investment to be recovered rather than a public responsibility to be discharged. Therefore, time has come for an inquest into the credible allegations of recruitment-related bribery and prosecute offenders where the evidence is overwhelming. The
Recruitment agencies, consultants and public officials should be held accountable when they solicit or collect illegal payments.
Applicants, equally, should have secure channels through which to report demands for bribes without exposing themselves to retaliation.
Nigeria's employment crisis makes recruitment corruption even more damaging.
According to the National Bureau of Statistics'(NBS) and the Nigeria Labour Force Survey for the first quarter of 2024, the unemployment rate was 5.3 per cent, compared with 5.0 per cent in the third quarter of 2023. The unemployment rate among people aged 15 to 24 was 8.4 per cent. The same survey reported that 14.4 per cent of young people were not in education, employment or training. These figures are interpreted using the NBS's revised labour-market methodology.
The headline unemployment rate does not capture every form of economic hardship, including inadequate working hours, insecure informal employment and the widespread difficulty of finding a decent, well-paid job. The survey also reported that 92.7 per cent of employed people were in informal employment in the first quarter of 2024, highlighting the importance of job quality as well as job availability. Against this background, however, the exclusion of qualified applicants through nepotism and bribery is particularly indefensible. Every public vacancy filled through a manipulated process can deny another Nigerian an opportunity to earn a livelihood, support dependants and contribute productively to the economy.
Recruitment corruption does not, by itself, explain Nigeria's unemployment situation. The economy also suffers from inadequate industrial expansion, infrastructure deficiencies, investment constraints, insecurity and other structural challenges.
However, corrupt recruitment makes an already difficult employment market less fair and less efficient. It also undermines public confidence in education. In this situation, the question that comes to mind is why should a young person invest years in university, professional training and examinations if the perceived route to employment is through a politician, a wealthy relative or an unofficial payment?
When qualifications cease to inspire confidence that effort will be rewarded, society risks discouraging diligence, innovation and personal responsibility. The damage extends beyond the unsuccessful applicant. It affects parents who invested their savings in education, communities that lose the contributions of talented young people and public institutions that may fail to recruit the best available personnel.
Recruitment injustice in Nigeria, over the years, has also contributed significantly to country's continuing struggle with the emigration of skilled workers and young professionals in what is today known as talent flight or 'japa' syndrome.
This 'japa' phenomenon has multiple causes, including economic instability, insecurity, inadequate salaries, weak public services, limited career opportunities and the attraction of better working conditions abroad. For instance, a qualified engineer who repeatedly encounters opaque recruitment processes may begin to believe that professional advancement is impossible without connections. Same as a medical graduate who sees appointments determined by influence rather than competence may seek opportunities in a country where recruitment and promotion appear more predictable. And a highly trained researcher who cannot secure a suitable position may take those skills elsewhere.
Nigeria consequently risks losing people whose education was partly financed by their families and, in many cases, by public investment. The resultant consequence is that the country faces the painful contradiction of producing talented graduates while struggling to create a system capable of deploying their talents fairly. Nevertheless, a transparent employment system would strengthen the reasons for talented citizens to build their careers at home. The government cannot credibly appeal to patriotism while allowing avoidable institutional practices to convince qualified citizens that their future lies elsewhere.
However, the consequences of recruitment nepotism reach far beyond individual disappointment. It is a huge price Nigeria will pay. This practice weakens institutional competence, especially where appointments are determined by relationships rather than relevant qualifications or agencies risk losing the expertise required to deliver essential services. it also entrenches inequality as children of privileged officials may enjoy repeated access to opportunities, while equally qualified children from poor households struggle to enter the same institutions. Besides, it deepens public distrust where citizens who believe that public institutions are captured by powerful families are less likely to regard government decisions as fair.
This practice of recruitment inequality often encourage ethnic and regional suspicion. In a federation as diverse as Nigeria, the concentration of appointments among a few groups can fuel the belief that government institutions serve sectional interests rather than the country as a whole. This scenario
threatens future generations of the country if access to secure employment increasingly depends on family influence. Privilege can reproduce itself across generations, thereby weakening social mobility. And the
recruitment corruption may undermine the government's own development objectives. In such situation, institutions responsible for healthcare, education, revenue collection, infrastructure and national security would require competent personnel selected through credible processes. The consequences of poor recruitment can therefore affect the quality of services delivered to millions of Nigerians.
NEWSLEADER'S OFFER ON HOW TO END THE PRACTICE
The Nigerian NewsLeader believes that the time has come for a coordinated national campaign to restore fairness to public employment. Every vacancy must be advertised transparently. Federal and state institutions should be compelled to publish all vacancies, qualifications, application deadlines, selection criteria and the number of available positions through accessible official platforms and appropriate public notices.
Recruitment of applicants should be independently auditable. As a matter fact, each exercise should preserve application records, examination results, interview scores, shortlists and the reasons for final selections. Subject to legitimate privacy protections, the public should be able to scrutinise the process. This is in addition that the Federal Character Commission must become more effective and should regularly publish compliance reports, identify institutions that violate recruitment guidelines and pursue the sanctions available under the law. And the FCC's oversight must be substantive rather than ceremonial.
The anti-corruption agencies should investigate allegations or reported cases recruitment bribery. The Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) should investigate matters within their respective mandates, working with the police and other authorities where necessary. Officials who solicit bribes or manipulate appointments should face disciplinary and criminal consequences where the evidence establishes wrongdoing.
Government also must dismantle the culture of reserved positions for relatives. No official should be allowed to nominate a successor to a public-service position as though it were private property. Vacancies created by retirement, resignation, death or promotion should be officially filled through lawful procedures. And where allegations of family-based recruitment arise, the relevant institution should disclose the applicable recruitment procedure and subject the exercise to independent review.
More importantly, consulting arrangements should not become a route around recruitment rules. The Federal Character Commission's published procedures prohibit contracting out public-service recruitment to consulting firms while permitting designated public institutions to organise certain screening and aptitude tests. Agencies must comply with the applicable rules and disclose the roles of any bodies involved in their selection processes. That way, applicants will be protected. Also, a confidential complaint mechanism should allow candidates to report bribery demands, manipulated examinations and suspicious appointments. Such whistleblowers should be protected against retaliation, while their complaints should be investigated fairly by the appropriate governmental body.
There is also a demanding need to deploy technology to strengthen accountability. Computerised examinations, independently verified results, digital application tracking and published recruitment timelines can reduce opportunities for interference. However, digital systems should be audited to prevent manipulation through unauthorised access. Merit and federal character need to work in tandem. Job recruitment should begin with clearly defined professional standards and apply equitable representation among qualified candidates in accordance with constitutional requirements. Neither merit nor inclusion should be used as a pretext for corruption.
And government also should publish their annual recruitment statistics covering vacancies, applications, successful candidates, geographical representation, complaints and disciplinary outcomes. Without reliable information, it will remain difficult to measure progress or identify persistent offenders.
Nigeria stands at a critical point in its national development march. Its growing population requires more productive employment, stronger institutions and greater confidence that hard work can lead to advancement. The country cannot achieve these objectives while qualified citizens are made to feel that public employment belongs to those who possess political connections, financial resources or influential family names. It should be made a national policy to rejects the conversion of public institutions into patronage networks. The sale of appointments, the manipulation of recruitment examinations and the reservation of positions for the relatives of retiring officials must be collectively rejected and outlawed.
There is also urgent need to reject the misuse of federal character as a justification for favouritism. The constitutional principle exists to promote inclusion and national unity, not to shield corrupt appointments from scrutiny. Every applicant deserves fair treatment, and no one should be presumed unqualified merely because a parent or relative occupies an influential position.
The decisive test should be whether the recruitment exercise was lawful, transparent, competitive and consistent with the applicable qualifications and representation requirements.
President Bola Tinubu's administration, the state governors, the National Assembly, state legislatures, the Federal Civil Service Commission, the Federal Character Commission and the leadership of public institutions have immediate responsibility to treat this worrisome national problem as a state priority. Document irregularities should
investigated by the authorities with a view to expose recruitment fraud, protect whistleblowers and ensure that offenders face proportionate consequences.
The young people of this country have a right to demand a system in which their qualifications, abilities and performance matter more than their surnames or personal connections.
A nation that rewards competence strengthens its future. And if such nation rewards connections at the expense of competence, it has betrayed the youths of that country and mortgaged their future. Therefore, Nigeria must freely open the doors of public employment to qualified citizens, or allow the doors to remain guarded by money, influence and inherited privilege at the expense her future. Let's collectively stand firmly for equal opportunity, transparent recruitment, professional competence, constitutional compliance for a public service that belongs to all Nigerian people, not to a privileged few. NNL.
