Examination malpractice has been classified as one of the multifarious acts that depicts or symbolizes social deviance. Virtually all the levels of education in Nigeria have been identified with series of examination malpractice, in one way or the other.

This article seeks to clarify the concept of examination malpractice, the causes, the effects, the suggested solutions and above all, the position of the law on examination malpractice. Many people are oblivious of the examination malpractice act, and this article aims to demystify the examination malpractice act.

Examination is a mechanism through which the students’ understanding on a subject matter is assessed. According to the Merriam Webster dictionary, examination is defined as“an exercise designed to examine progress or test qualification or knowledge”. Examination is regarded by all and sundry as a test of knowledge, albeit, a debate has been ongoing about the veracity of the assertion. Malpractice occurs when there is a flagrant violation of the ethics guiding a particular phenomenon(modus operandi).. According to the examination malpractice act:

Examination malpractice means an act which constitute an offence under this act.

Examination malpractice is a situation whereby an individual (s) in the course of writing his examination, or Before, involves himself in any act that’s forbidden by the Examination malpractice act, in an attempt to pass the examination in question. In Nigeria, the tentacle of exam malpractice is also extended to the officials in charge of the conduct of an exam. Examination malpractice has assumed an height of importance and it is in vogue in virtually all Nigerian institutions. Examination malpractice occurs in two ways: Electronic examination malpractice means: cheating during an exam with the aid of technological gadgets e.g. phones, earpiece, computers etc. Non electronic exam malpractice occurs Through the use of human abilities e.g side talking, looking at another person’s work(girrafeing in Nigerian parlance), constituting nuisance etc. Examination malpractice is a phenomenon that’s ubiquitous and trending among students of Nigerian institutions. The causes of examination malpractice include inter Alia: laziness on the part of students, unscrupulous teachers, peer group influence and parental influence.

The applicable law in a situation of exam malpractice in Nigeria is the Examination Malpractice Acts Cap E15, LFN 2004. Section 1(1) of the aforesaid act prohibits the illegal acquisition of question papers, either by fraudulent trick or device, by false pretence, or with the intention of seeking to gain an undue advantage for oneself. S1 of the act also has embedded therein, the appropriate sanctions that’ll be imposed on anyone who flagrantly violates the provisions thereof. It was unequivocally stated in S1(2) that any person who is convicted and under eighteen years of age will be punished through the imposition of the option of a fine of N100,000 or a jail term of not exceeding three years. It’s sacrosanct to note that, an offender can be sentenced to prison and still have the embargo of a fine imposed on him, contemporaneously. However, if the offence involves a key official, he or she will be sentenced to a jail term or four years without the option of a fine. This brings to the fore that, an individual, no matter his or her hierarchy, who involves himself in exam malpractice will be dealt with accordingly.

In the same vein, S.2 of the act addressed the theft of question papers. In situations whereby a candidate at any moment in the exam, tries to steal examination materials, he or she, if found guilty, will be convicted and imprisoned for a jail term not exceeding three years, an option of fine, or both, at the same time(depending on how grievous the offence is).

Similarly, section 3 of the act elucidates on and prohibits impersonation. If an individual falsely represents himself to be a candidate sitting for an examination, attempts to write an examination on behalf of another person, such an individual commits an offence and therefore, is liable to punishment, as provide for in the Examination malpractice act. An offender is liable to imprisonment for a period of not exceeding three years, an option of fine not exceeding 100,000 or both. However, in a situation whereby the offender is an official whose activities or duties should be targeted at the peaceful conduct of the exam, he is liable to imprisonment for 4 years without an option of fine. S3 goes further to state that, a person who alters or manipulates a document which has been issued to a candidate commits an offence and as such, will be punished accordingly.

Section 4 of the Examination Malpractice Act revolves around the maintenance of orderliness in the examination venue during the course of writing an examination. By the dint of Section 4(1), a candidate who leaves the examination venue and mixed up with other students, with the motive of involving in the commission of acts perceived as examination malpractice, commits an offence and is liable to conviction to a term of not exceeding 3 years or an option of fine not exceeding N50,000. It must be noted that offenders will not be allowed entry into the examination venue again. It’s also prohibited for the candidates to seek unlawful excuses, with ulterior motives.

Section 5 of the act prohibits disturbances during the course of writing an examination: an individual who, is located in a place that has a close proximity with the exam venue, and possesses harmful weapons, or instigates individuals into the perpetuation of activities aimed at disorganizing the examination hall/ making the examination to culminate in a pandemonium, if found guilty, will be punished with the imposition of a fine of N100,000, or imprisonment for a reasonable amount of time.

Section 6 of the aforesaid act, seeks to ensure tranquility in the conduct of exams. According to section 6, any person (s) who is reluctant to obey law enforcement agents, disobedience of exam officials, unruly behavior, etc, commits an offence and as such. Is liable to a fine of 50,000, imprisonment for a period of 3 years, or both. It’s also stated further that violators risks removal from the examination venue.

According to S.7 of the act, any person(s) who decides to willfully obstructs officials whose presence are sacrosanct for the conduct of the examination commits an offence and is liable to imprisonment and the option of a fine, if found guilty. Section 8 prohibits the forgery of a document. Pursuant to section 8 of the act, any person(s) who forges or manipulates a document that’s sensitive to an examination, commits an offence and as such, is liable to imprisonment for a term ofnot exceeding three years or a option of fine of N100,000 or both.

Section 9 of the act elucidates on the breach of duty. Any official who fails woefully in the performance of his or her duty, commits an offence, and if convicted is liable to imprisonment for a term of four years without the option of a fine. On the part of an individual who is vested with the responsibility of handling or making question papers available, if he or she reveals the sensitive information on the newspaper illegally to anyone, is liable to imprisonment for a term of five years.

Conversely, section 10 of the act nullifies conspiracy. If an individual cooperates or incites another individual into committing the offence tagged as examination Malpractice by the act, he is liable, upon conviction to imprisonment and fine, as embedded in the act.

Section 11 of the act revolves around the fact that anyone who attempts the commission of acts nullified by the examination malpractice act, invariably, commits the act and as such, the appropriate punishment that will be meted out to someone caught in the act, will also be imposed upon him.

As regards the court of competent jurisdiction, section 14 of the act donates the power of trying offenders to the Federal High Court. The court of competent jurisdiction is also exemplified in the case of University of Uyo V. Essel (2006) ALL FWLR (Pt.315) 104 (CA)where the court held that:

…”Examination malpractice can only be tried by a competent criminal court…”

However, it’s pertinent to note that institutions can also discipline students on examination malpractice. The requirement that must be met by the university is that, there must be strict adherence to the twin principles of natural justice; the doctrines of Audi alterampartem and Nemo judexincausasua. See the case of Kobi V. UsmanuDanfodiyo University Sokoto& ORS (2018) LPELR-44665(CA).

Suffice it to say that, in situations whereby a minor is charged with the offence of examination malpractices, he shall not be dealt with under the examination malpractices act, rather, he shall be dealt with under the provisions of the Children and young persons act). See section 13 of the examination malpractice act.

The prevalence of examination Malpractice has been so injurious to the Nigerian society. Notable among the effects of Examination Malpractice is the decline in the standard of education. The educational system has been impaired such that, half baked graduates are being churned our yearly by universities. The credibility of certificates is now within the province of doubt.

Examination malpractice is a deviant act that needs to be eradicated in our society, to the barest minimum. In the light of this, it is recommending that the government should organize enlightenment programmes for parents and students about the dangers of examination malpractice. Offenders who have been found guilty should be penalized accordingly, so that they will serve as deterrent to others. The members of the public should also endeavor to know about the examination Malpractice acts, because the ignorance of the law isn’t an excuse for breaking the law. Having the knowledge of the act, will play a great role in making them know about the acts they need to avoid in the course of writing an exam.To sum it up, justice shouldn’t be perverted.

Ojo Emmanuel Oluwatobi. Abu Zaria. 100l. He can be reached via 08145929919.