By Yisa Usman
The disclosure by the Registrar of the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB), Prof. Ishaq Oloyede, that the agency plans to discontinue the movement of examination servers across centres by 2027, replacing them with flash-based solutions, raised public interest and concern. While this policy shift may relieve officers of the Board from the punitive consequences historically associated with the mishandling of such assets, especially given that a number of staff were dismissed under the Oloyede-led administration over incidents involving the theft of servers, it still calls for closer scrutiny. The move is presented as a measure to curb logistical vulnerabilities but raises deeper questions about policy consistency, implications for security, future direction of examination infrastructure, accountability, and the long-term integrity of Nigeria’s computer-based testing system.
The timing of this proposed reform is equally significant. The Registrar is in the final stretch of his second and statutorily maximum tenure, due to lapse on July 31, marking ten years in office, with the current examination cycle expected to be his last. In this context, it is prudent that far-reaching structural and technological changes of this magnitude be left to the incoming leadership that will bear responsibility for their long-term implementation. Introducing such major policy shifts at this stage risks constraining a successor and creating avoidable operational and accountability burdens.
This concern is compounded by growing public outcry over speculated tenure extensions, which not only enable overstay in office but also deny other qualified and experienced administrators the opportunity to contribute to institutional development. Recent instances of tenure elongation in public offices have attracted criticism for undermining statutory provisions and due process, and such practices should not be normalised. It is therefore imperative that the Federal Government ensures strict adherence to the enabling Act governing JAMB, particularly regarding tenure limits and the transparent appointment of a new Registrar, in order to preserve institutional integrity and allow fresh leadership to introduce ideas capable of advancing the agency’s performance.
For close to a decade, JAMB has invested heavily in server-based infrastructure as the backbone of its Computer-Based Test (CBT) regime. These investments were justified on grounds of enhanced security, centralized control, and the reduction of examination malpractice. The proposed shift away from this architecture inevitably prompts scrutiny. If servers are now considered dispensable, what then justified the enormous public funds committed to their procurement, deployment, and maintenance over the past ten years? Public institutions are expected to demonstrate continuity and strategic foresight, not frequent reversals that suggest either poor planning or evolving justifications for past expenditures.
Equally concerning is the fate of the hundreds of existing servers currently. In the absence of a clearly articulated transition framework, there is a real risk that these assets could become yet another chapter in Nigeria’s long history of poorly managed public property. Without a transparent and actioned plan for audit, valuation, and disposal, the policy shift raises legitimate fears that the servers may ultimately be unaccounted for. This concern is not speculative. It recalls the controversy of 2018, when the Registrar donated the Board’s assets without recourse to the provisions of Sections 55 and 56 of the Public Procurement Act 2007, which set out clear guidelines for the disposal of government property. The assets in question, valued at several millions of naira, included a heavy-duty truck, optical mark readable (OMR) scanners, and computer systems.
A report of the Auditor-General for the Federation on the forensic investigation into a petition on financial and other infractions against JAMB, issued in February 2024, concluded that the Board failed to obtain the requisite approvals prior to the transfer of those assets. Although JAMB maintained in its response that the items were obsolete and had a book value of ten naira, the applicable legal framework still required proper valuation, documentation, and regulatory clearance. On this premise, the risk of similarly classifying the servers as obsolete, despite their significant cost and continuing operational relevance, cannot be discounted.
The Board’s failure to obtain clearance from the Bureau of Public Procurement to satisfy Section 56(1–3) of the Act further underscored the legal lapses involved. That provision requires the accounting officer to authorize the preparation of a valuation report by a competent body, ensure that disposal is properly planned and integrated into the institution’s income and expenditure projections, and that such disposal is timed to achieve optimal returns for the government. That episode highlighted the consequences of weak compliance with due process, and it is imperative that such lapses are not repeated under the current reform agenda, regardless of its technological framing.
Beyond asset management, the proposed reliance on flash drives introduces a different set of security vulnerabilities that cannot be ignored. Unlike servers, which operate within controlled and often encrypted environments, flash drives are inherently portable and easily duplicated. The risk of unauthorized copying, leakage of examination content, and compromise of sensitive data is significantly heightened unless extraordinary safeguards are put in place. In an era where examination malpractice has become increasingly sophisticated, it is difficult to see how a system built around portable storage devices would offer stronger protection than the centralized systems it seeks to replace.
Globally, examination bodies have continued to strengthen, not abandon, server-based and cloud-integrated systems. Institutions such as Educational Testing Service and Pearson VUE rely on secure networks, real-time authentication, and encrypted data transmission to safeguard examination processes. Even in jurisdictions with infrastructural constraints, hybrid models still maintain centralized control mechanisms. Against this backdrop, a shift to flash-based deployment appears less like innovation and more like a technological retreat, raising concerns about whether the decision is driven by strategic advancement or operational convenience.
The Registrar’s additional disclosure that examination questions can now be set remotely “from the comfort of their offices” further complicates the narrative. While digital collaboration is not inherently problematic, the integrity of high-stakes examinations depends on tightly controlled environments, strict access protocols, and verifiable audit trails. Globally, question banks remain a cornerstone of standardized testing, with institutions like College Board maintaining rigorously secured item pools that undergo continuous psychometric validation. Any perception that such systems are being diluted in favour of convenience risks undermining confidence in the credibility of the examination process.
Taken together, these developments suggest a need for caution rather than celebration. Innovation in public institutions must be measured not only by novelty but by demonstrable improvements in security, efficiency, and accountability. A transition of this magnitude requires comprehensive stakeholder engagement, transparent technical explanations, and clear safeguards against both operational risks and governance failures. Without these, the proposed reforms risk being perceived as a repackaging of older, less secure methodologies, coming after a decade of significant public investment in a different technological direction.
At a time when public trust in institutions is closely tied to transparency and accountability, JAMB must go beyond broad assurances. It must provide detailed clarity on the architecture of the new system, the safeguards against data compromise, and, critically, the documented and lawful handling of existing assets. Anything less would not only invite scrutiny but could erode confidence in one of Nigeria’s most critical examination bodies.
Yisa Usman is a Governance, Procurement and Accountability Professional. He is a Fellow of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Nigeria and a Doctoral Candidate. He writes from Abuja. Email: topusman@gmail.com
JAMB’s Shift from Servers to Flash Drives: Innovation or a Risky Regression?
