NYSC: A Legacy Worth Keeping or Letting Go?
By Maryam Dayyabu Abdulwahab,
For decades, the National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) has been regarded as a rite of passage for Nigerian graduates—a program designed to promote national unity, cultural exchange, and practical work experience.
Established in 1973, it was meant to heal a country still reeling from the scars of the civil war. But in today’s Nigeria, a country battling insecurity, youth unemployment, and a rapidly changing economy, the relevance of NYSC is widely debated.
Proponents of NYSC argue that it remains a crucial tool for national cohesion. The scheme forces young graduates out of their comfort zones, exposing them to cultures, traditions, and realities they might never have encountered otherwise.
In a deeply divided country, where ethnic and religious tensions often run high, NYSC—at least in theory—acts as a bridge, fostering a sense of shared identity. Beyond unity, some see NYSC as an opportunity for personal growth and career development.
The one-year mandatory service often serves as the first real exposure to the job market, with some corps members securing permanent jobs through their postings. The program also provides a platform for entrepreneurship, especially through its Skill Acquisition and Entrepreneurship Development (SAED) initiative.
But for every argument in favor of NYSC, there are pressing counterpoints that raise doubts about its continued relevance. One of the biggest concerns is security. In a time when kidnappings, insurgency, and banditry have become rampant, sending young graduates—many of them from urban centers—to volatile areas feels like a dangerous gamble.
Year after year, reports emerge of corps members being attacked, abducted, or even killed in service. If the government struggles to protect its citizens in general, can it truly guarantee the safety of thousands of fresh graduates scattered across the country?
Read Also:
Then comes the issue of employment. Nigeria’s job market is brutal, with millions of graduates competing for a limited number of positions. Does NYSC equip young people with skills that make them more employable?
The reality is that many corps members spend their service year performing menial tasks in government offices, serving as cheap labor rather than gaining valuable experience. In an era where digital skills, entrepreneurship, and innovation drive economies, a program designed in the 1970s hardly aligns with modern workforce demands.
There is also the economic argument. Running NYSC is an expensive endeavor, with the government bearing the cost of allowances, logistics, and administrative expenses for hundreds of thousands of corps members annually.
At a time when the country struggles with economic instability and rising debt, is maintaining NYSC still a justifiable priority? Could these funds be better spent on youth empowerment programs that provide long-term opportunities instead of a one-year, often directionless scheme?
Perhaps the most glaring sign of NYSC’s declining relevance is the way many young Nigerians now view it—not as an opportunity but as an obligation they must endure. What was once seen as an adventure is now often regarded as a waste of time, with many trying to manipulate the system to get postings in cities or even avoid the program altogether.
When the very people it was designed for begin to question its value, does that not signal a need for urgent reform or even a complete overhaul? NYSC is not without merit, but it is no longer the powerful force it once was.
If it must continue, then it must evolve. It should be restructured to focus more on skill-building, job creation, and safety. Posting graduates to government offices where they do little to nothing serves no real purpose.
Instead, corps members should be actively engaged in industries that align with their fields of study and the demands of the modern job market. The challenge is no longer just about NYSC’s existence—it is about its effectiveness.
In a country that has changed dramatically since 1973, a program designed for a different era must prove that it still holds value, or risk being remembered as a well-intended but outdated experiment.
