Follow Us on Google
From Scholastica Hir, Makurdi
The family of one of the students abducted on their way to sit for the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) examinations on Wednesday has condemned the examination body for denying that the victims were its candidates.
Eighteen passengers aboard a Benue Links bus were attacked and kidnapped along the Makurdi–Otukpo road on Wednesday, April 15. It was reported that several of the passengers were students heading to Otukpo to sit for their examinations the following morning.
A relative of one of the victims, who requested anonymity, described JAMB’s statement as “disturbing and dismissive”, stressing that a large number of passengers on the bus were travelling to sit for the Unified Tertiary Matriculation Examination (UTME).
The relative said, “My nephew was on that bus, and he was heading to Otukpo for his JAMB examination. In fact, most of the passengers were candidates. Only a few were not going for the exam. That explains why they hurried to travel that evening; they had exams scheduled for early morning the next day.”
“It is shocking to hear JAMB say there were no candidates on that bus. That is simply not true. I know this firsthand.”
The distraught relative attributed the incident to what he described as JAMB’s “problematic posting system”. He noted that, rather than allowing students to sit for examinations in centres nearest to their place of residence, the examination body frequently posts them to distant locations, requiring candidates to travel long distances.
Other News
He said: “These are the consequences of JAMB’s inadequacies. How do you expect young people to travel such long distances just to write an exam? Some candidates are even posted from Makurdi to places as far as Jalingo in Taraba State.”
“While we are not blaming JAMB for the kidnapping, they must accept responsibility for creating the conditions that expose candidates to such risks.”
He stated further: “They sent candidates from Makurdi to Otukpo, and this happened. If those candidates were allowed to write the exam closer to home, this situation might not have occurred. I know several people, including my neighbours, who travelled that same route because JAMB posted them there.”
The relative argued that the JAMB statement showed a lack of empathy, noting that its response failed to acknowledge the pain of the affected families. “At a time like this, what families expect is compassion, not denial. Instead of showing concern and supporting efforts to secure the victims’ release, they are focused on disputing whether those abducted were candidates. That is insensitive.”
He provided further clarification, saying: “My nephew’s exam was scheduled for April 16, 2026, which is why they travelled on April 15. I know this because I personally paid for his registration. That bus carried more candidates than any other group of passengers.”
While acknowledging that JAMB did not organise the journey, he insisted that the board still bears some responsibility. “They may argue that they didn’t arrange the transport, but these were candidates travelling for an exam conducted by JAMB. That connection alone should make them more responsive and responsible.”
He urged the examination body to retract its statement and show solidarity with the victims’ families, saying, “I strongly advise JAMB to withdraw that statement and express sympathy. Families are in distress, and dismissing their claims only adds to their pain. It is unfair and unacceptable.”
