The Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) has warned higher education institutions against admitting lower-ranked candidates while overlooking those with higher ranks.

The examination body has instructed an immediate reversal of such improper admissions and emphasized that all institutions must strictly follow the established guidelines for candidate selection and admission.

A statement from JAMB’s Public Communication Advisor, Fabian Benjamin, highlighted that university admissions operate under a three-tier policy: Merit, Catchment Area, and Educationally Less Developed States (ELDS).

The statement indicated that “each tier is strictly governed by merit, whereby candidates with higher rankings must be prioritized, followed by others in descending order.

“Any instance where a higher-ranked candidate is overlooked in favor of a lower-ranked candidate within any of these categories will not be accepted by the Board.

However, the Board has refuted recent allegations made by certain individuals who frequently encourage candidates to raise baseless issues for personal benefit.

“Following an investigation, it was determined that the candidate mentioned in the allegation, who was claimed to have scored highly yet was not admitted by the University of Nigeria, Nsukka (UNN), was not at a disadvantage, as numerous higher-ranked candidates were ahead of her on the admission list.

“As a result, her non-admission was consistent with the established process of not ranking sufficiently high to be included in the selected group,” the statement concluded.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is JAMB's stance on irregular admissions?

JAMB warns institutions against admitting lower-ranked candidates and mandates adherence to established guidelines for candidate selection.

What are the tiers of the university admissions policy?

The university admissions policy operates on three tiers: Merit, Catchment Area, and Educationally Less Developed States (ELDS).

How did JAMB respond to the allegations of unfair admissions?

JAMB dismissed the allegations, stating that the candidate in question was not disadvantaged since several higher-ranked candidates were ahead of her on the admission list.