“Amnesty or Apartheid? Niger Delta Delegates Accuse PAP of Bias and Backdoor Admissions”
By Paul Ebi
Tension is rising within the Presidential Amnesty Programme (PAP) following strong reactions from beneficiaries over the programme’s education policy, particularly the prioritisation of “impacted communities” alongside registered delegates.
Speaking on the broader vision of the Amnesty Programme, the Head of Education at PAP, Dr. Charles Ariye, urged stakeholders to adopt a wider perspective beyond what he described as a narrow definition of beneficiaries.
“As a people, we have to think widely about the Amnesty Programme. Clearly, we must not narrow it to only those about 30,000 captured at Obubra as so-called legitimate beneficiaries. We will be undoing ourselves if we continue to dwell on that premise,” Ariye said.
He emphasised that the impacted community principle remains a key tool for expanding access to formal education across the Niger Delta, arguing that long-term investment in education would yield visible benefits in the near future.
Drawing a historical parallel, Ariye referenced late Chief Obafemi Awolowo, noting that his enduring legacy in Western Nigeria was built on massive investment in education at all levels.
“He gave his people education, education and education—primary, secondary and tertiary. We must understand the direction of Chief Dr. Dennis Otuaro within this same context of expanding educational opportunities for our people,” Ariye added.
Beneficiaries Cry Foul
However, the remarks have triggered angry responses from several Amnesty beneficiaries, who accuse the current PAP leadership of sidelining “main delegates” in favour of non-delegates and select groups.
One beneficiary questioned the fairness of the policy, alleging discrimination in admissions.
“It is very unfortunate that the administrator of this programme and his subordinates fail to do the right thing with the main delegates. How does your boss give admission to non-delegates and special treatment to impacted communities, while main delegates who wrote JAMB for two years are still denied access to study?” he asked.
Others raised concerns over what they described as a biased sharing formula, accusing the administration of favouring certain states, camps and leaders.
“What is your sharing formula in terms of states, camps and leaders? This administration is biased and not considerate. We feel victimised,” another beneficiary said.
Questions were also raised about the definition of “main delegates” and the alleged allocation of education slots to camp leaders.
“Ask your camp leaders if Dr. Otuaro has not given them slots. How many slots were given to camp leaders? Go and ask your leaders,” a beneficiary alleged.
Some beneficiaries claimed that only a few camp leaders benefited during Phase II, while others were left out, creating desperation and internal conflicts.
“Even camp leaders are now begging to be given slots. Anyone who criticises is put on the bad book. God is watching,” one reaction read.
Allegations of Blacklisting
Adding to the controversy, a beneficiary recounted a past experience of alleged blacklisting during a previous administration, describing it as traumatic and unjust.
“I was affected by a blacklist issue during the tenure of Dikio. Someone from the office later called to ask why my name was there. It was only resolved after he left. Till today, I can’t forget his name or what he did,” the beneficiary said.
Growing Unease
As dissatisfaction spreads, beneficiaries warn that unresolved grievances could deepen mistrust within the programme. One reaction concluded with a cautionary note aimed at those in power:
“No throne is rented for eternity; even the sun sets for another to rise.”
With accusations of bias, lack of transparency and unequal access to education gaining traction, pressure is mounting on the PAP leadership to clarify policies, address grievances, and restore confidence among core Amnesty beneficiaries across the Niger Delta.
