In an increasingly globalized world, one would expect immigration policies to evolve in fairness and accessibility. Unfortunately, many English and French-speaking countries continue to require standardized language tests — such as IELTS (International English Language Testing System) and TEF (Test d’Évaluation de Français) — from immigrants, including those from countries where English or French is already an official language. This blanket requirement is not only unnecessary, but it is also discriminatory, exploitative, and serves as a thinly veiled means of restricting mobility.
For citizens of countries like Nigeria, Ghana, Kenya, or Cameroon — where English or French is the language of education, governance, and business — the demand to prove their language proficiency is both offensive and illogical. Many of these applicants are university graduates, often trained in highly technical fields, and have used English or French throughout their academic and professional lives. To then insist they take a costly standardized test, simply to prove they can speak a language they’ve already mastered, is redundant and demeaning.
Even more concerning is the structure and intent of these tests. Rather than measuring functional language ability, they often present abstract and academic questions that are irrelevant to real-life communication. This design seems less about assessing capability and more about filtering out applicants. When individuals fail — not because they lack fluency, but because the test was structured to confuse — they are forced to retake the exam at great financial cost, creating a lucrative cycle of dependency for testing organizations.
These tests are expensive. In many African and developing nations, the fee for a single IELTS exam can equate to a month’s salary — and that’s before factoring in additional costs like preparation courses and repeated sittings. For most aspiring immigrants, this is not just an inconvenience; it’s a financial hardship. Worse still, the test results are only valid for two years, further entrenching this system of monetized migration.
It is deeply ironic that degrees and qualifications from English- or French-speaking institutions are not recognized as proof of language ability. Yet, citizens from Western countries are rarely subjected to similar tests when moving abroad, highlighting a double standard rooted in privilege.
Language proficiency tests should be reserved for voluntary use — such as by universities or employers where specific communication standards are required. Immigration authorities should rely on more holistic evaluations: academic transcripts, interviews, or work history. The current system does not promote fairness; it perpetuates inequality and profit-driven gatekeeping.
If these policies were truly about integration or communication, they would be applied with nuance. Instead, they function as bureaucratic walls — obstacles that limit opportunity for qualified individuals based on arbitrary and unnecessary criteria.
It’s time for English and French-speaking countries to abandon these outdated requirements. Immigration should not be about how much one can pay to pass a test, but about the value individuals bring to society. We must dismantle this discriminatory system and replace it with one rooted in fairness, respect, and common sense.
SAMUEL AMADI
MPI, MSPSP, MICMC, ACIArb, FIFPNP.