Alleged N5.2bn Fraud: Former JAMB Registrar and ICPC Pursue Out-of-Court Settlement
By Biola Adebayo | July 16, 2025
High-Profile Corruption Case Takes New Turn
The corruption case involving former Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) Registrar, Professor Dibu Ojerinde, has taken a significant turn as both parties have agreed to pursue an out-of-court settlement. The Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) had accused Ojerinde of allegedly misappropriating N5.2 billion during his tenure.
This development comes after several court appearances where both legal teams indicated their willingness to explore alternative dispute resolution methods. The case, which has drawn national attention, highlights ongoing efforts to combat corruption in Nigeria’s public institutions.
Background of the Case
Professor Ojerinde served as JAMB Registrar from 2007 to 2016, overseeing the critical examination body responsible for university admissions in Nigeria. The ICPC initiated investigations following allegations of financial impropriety during his administration.
The anti-graft commission filed charges including:
- Money laundering
- Abuse of office
- Diversion of public funds
- Operating undeclared bank accounts
Legal Proceedings and Settlement Attempts
This marks the second time both parties have attempted to resolve the matter through settlement. Earlier negotiations stalled, leading to continued court proceedings. However, during the most recent hearing at the Federal High Court in Abuja, lawyers representing both sides informed Justice Inyang Ekwo of their renewed commitment to settlement discussions.
Ojerinde’s defense team, led by prominent attorney Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), argued that their client maintains his innocence but is open to resolution to avoid prolonged litigation. The ICPC prosecution team, while maintaining their position on the alleged offenses, acknowledged the potential benefits of settlement.
Public Reaction and Accountability Concerns
The case has sparked mixed reactions from education stakeholders and anti-corruption advocates. Some view the settlement option as a pragmatic approach to justice, while others express concerns about accountability for alleged large-scale corruption in public institutions.
Education rights activist Amina Mohammed commented: “While we respect legal processes, the public deserves transparency regarding how such significant public funds were allegedly mismanaged. Any settlement should include full restitution and clear terms.”
Next Steps in the Legal Process
The court has granted both parties additional time to finalize settlement terms. Key considerations include:
- Potential restitution amounts
- Admission of liability clauses
- Future restrictions on public service
- Monitoring provisions
Justice Ekwo has scheduled a follow-up hearing for September to review progress. If settlement terms cannot be agreed upon, the case will proceed to full trial.
Broader Implications for Anti-Corruption Efforts
This case occurs against the backdrop of Nigeria’s ongoing fight against corruption. Legal experts note that out-of-court settlements in high-profile corruption cases can serve multiple purposes:
- Faster resolution than lengthy trials
- Guaranteed recovery of some public funds
- Reduced burden on the judicial system
However, critics argue that such settlements may undermine deterrence if not properly structured with meaningful consequences.
ICPC’s Position on Settlement
The anti-corruption commission maintains that any settlement must serve the public interest. ICPC spokesperson Azuka Ogugua stated: “Our primary objectives are recovering misappropriated funds and ensuring appropriate accountability. We will only accept terms that substantially achieve these goals.”
Legal observers will closely watch how this case develops, as it may set precedents for handling similar high-value corruption allegations in Nigeria’s education sector and beyond.
Credit: This report is based on original reporting from SolaceBase.