Student elections are often seen as a mini-version of national politics, where the tension between financial realities and the aspiration to serve comes to the fore. Despite the significant amounts of money involved in campaigns, those running for office stress that the union is not a business, and the goal is not to “make money back.” Instead, the emphasis remains on genuine service to the student body.
Running for a position in the student union requires a considerable financial commitment. For instance, Boluwatife “Tife” Aboderin, the current vice president, estimated that her campaign expenses ranged between 300,000 and 500,000 naira, most of which went into publicity. Similarly, Japheth, the current General Secretary, disclosed that his campaign required between 200,000 and 300,000 naira, primarily spent on logistics. In contrast, Bukola “B-Classy,” an aspirant for the vice presidency, mentioned operating on a much leaner budget of around 50,000 naira, relying on support from family and friends.
These figures highlight the significant costs associated with campaigning. However, all interviewees were clear: while money is necessary to run an effective campaign, they do not view their financial budgets as investments to be recouped in office. As Tife put it, “The business is not a union so you can’t make your money back, it is majorly service.”
Beyond the obvious expenses for publicity and logistics, candidates encounter additional financial pressures. They may need to secure endorsements, cover unexpected costs, and handle various “goodwill” expenses that arise during the campaign. Japheth said, “I had to buy food for some of the members of my campaign team.” These expenditures, while burdensome, are accepted as part of the commitment to leadership and service.
For candidates who do not win, the financial loss is tangible, but many see the experience as an investment in personal and political growth. Losing means that campaign funds will not be recovered, but the lessons learned in leadership, organisation, and networking prove invaluable. Aspirants recognise that the true return on their investment is not financial but developmental, equipping them for future opportunities in student service and beyond.
The emotional and psychological toll of losing an election can be significant, yet many candidates remain optimistic, believing that every campaign strengthens their ability to serve their peers more effectively in the future.
For those who win, victory brings new responsibilities rather than financial gain. A successful campaign does not translate into monetary profit but rather the duty to lead with integrity. The notion of “making money back” is set aside in favour of the commitment to serve the student body.
External sponsors, including well-wishers and supporters, sometimes contribute to campaign funding, but candidates like Covenant, Bukola, Olabisi and MKO insist that this backing is a show of belief in their leadership rather than a financial transaction. They emphasise the importance of ethical leadership, maintaining that the student union is a platform for service rather than personal enrichment.
When politics and money collide during student union elections, there is a chance that money may be misused or that decisions will be influenced by financial considerations. Uncertain budgeting procedures and campaign-related sponsored events have raised concerns because, if ignored, they might damage public confidence and result in patronage politics.
Aspirants should be actively pushed towards increased transparency and accountability. There should be a space for clear campaign spending guidelines and regular audits, which could assist in ensuring that financial contributions are gotten “legally” and will not pose any risk to the image of the union in later days.
The financial reality of student elections is complex. Campaigns require significant investment, but those involved reiterate that student politics is about service, not profit. While financial support is crucial, aspirants remain steadfast in their commitment to using their positions for meaningful change rather than personal gain.
As student politics evolve, the call for greater transparency in campaign spending becomes even more relevant. Stricter guidelines to ensure that financial integrity is maintained. By fostering accountability, student leaders can set a precedent for ethical governance, ensuring that while money facilitates campaigns, it never overshadows the true purpose of student politics: to serve with dedication and integrity.
The increasing cost of student campaigns, with spending ranging from ₦200,000 to ₦500,000, has raised concerns about the future of student leadership in Nigerian universities. While some may argue that such expenditures are necessary for effective campaigning, the perspectives of experts such as Mr Gideon Adeyeni and Mr Azeez Maleek paint a more cautionary picture.
Mr Gideon Adeyeni, Project Officer at Corporate Accountability and Public Participation Africa, believes the extravagant spending is both dangerous and a reflection of the same populism seen in national politics. He states, “It shows the increasing slide of student union leadership more towards the same state that the Nigerian government is, where only moneybags rule. Governance must cost as little as possible.” He warns that “If people spend stupendously to get to government, they will surely seek to enrich themselves.” Mr Adeyeni emphasises that student unions should exemplify how governance costs can be minimal, and describes the current situation as an “anomaly.” He also highlights the danger of issue-based campaigning being sidelined, noting, “The union is infested by the same populism that defines our politics outside.”Mr Adeyeni concludes by calling for a massive campaign to raise awareness about the dangers of excessive spending and for the introduction of regulatory measures. “Students should be conscientised in mass to see its danger,” he advocates.
Mr Azeez Maleek, President of the Foundation for Aspiring Youths in Ethical Leadership, also criticises the lavish spending in student elections, saying, “There is obviously nothing that justifies such a level of humongous and lavish spending…it sets a very dangerous precedence for subsequent elections and students’ governance.” He believes the lack of ideology among student leaders is deeply troubling, asserting, “No ideology. None! No binding module operandi to respect and obey as students’ leaders.” Mr Maleek further explains that the high spending reflects the influence of national politics on student elections: “The high spending in student elections today is an inspiration that comes from the national politics practised in Nigeria. It was adopted, and the trend was allowed to fester and become a norm.” He suggests that student assemblies should take action, stating, “The students’ assembly should push to peg an amount to students’ union aspirations and there can be ways to monitor it.”
Both experts agree that this culture of extravagant spending undermines the quality of student leadership. Mr Maleek expresses concern about the impact on governance, stating, “The quality of leadership is seriously affected. We continue to have leaders who think it is more stressful or unnecessary to hold congress.” Mr Adeyeni concurs, stating that the situation reflects the influence of “capitalist politicians” and predicts that it will lead to “corruption and misgovernance.” They both advocate for measures to regulate campaign spending and ensure that student leaders prioritize the interests of the student body over personal gain.
• This feature is part of a special series on the dynamics of the 2025 Students’ Union Election by the Union of Campus Journalists under its Election Watch Room Initiative.
