Restitution, Quality, and the Public Good: Rejoinder on Returning Four Schools to the Catholic Church
By: Fr. Dr. Okhueleigbe Osemhantie Ãmos|August 8, 2025
The decision by Governor Okpebholo to return four government-managed schools to the Catholic Church is best appreciated when placed in its proper historical and policy context. In the educational history of Nigeria, especially in Edo State, missionary bodies — notably the Catholic and Anglican missions — were not mere participants but the principal architects of formal schooling. They built, financed, and administered some of the finest educational institutions in the country long before state governments began their own large-scale expansion. The wave of compulsory takeovers in the early and mid-1970s, which affected nearly every mission school in the former Bendel State, was driven by the post–civil war atmosphere, the push for universal primary education, and the desire for uniformity of control. While arguably justified at the time, these measures disrupted the governance structures, community bonds, and institutional identities that had made these schools centres of academic and moral excellence. Half a century later, the socio-political and economic circumstances that led to such takeovers no longer hold, and there is a compelling case for restitution as both a matter of historical justice and of practical educational policy.
Critics often frame the debate in terms of affordability, but this focus on tuition as the primary measure of access is misplaced. The true cost of education lies not in the fees paid but in the content delivered, the competence of the teaching staff, and the formative environment in which learning takes place. A free education that leaves learners underprepared for life is far more expensive on the long run than a fee-paying education that equips them with discipline, knowledge, and moral grounding. This is not an abstract assertion: historical records from Edo State show that mission-managed schools consistently produced leaders, professionals, and innovators, many of whom rose to national and international prominence. In these institutions, academic rigour was matched by a deliberate cultivation of virtues such as integrity, responsibility, and service. Even today, mission schools employ various models — scholarships, bursaries, and flexible payment arrangements — to ensure that bright but underprivileged students are not denied opportunity. Thus, the notion that mission schools are inherently elitist ignores the lived reality of thousands of beneficiaries from modest backgrounds who rose through such systems.
From the standpoint of governance theory, the return of these schools reflects the principle of subsidiarity — the idea that social functions should be carried out by the smallest competent authority, with higher levels providing support and regulation. It is a model that has been successfully applied in diverse jurisdictions, from European mixed-provision systems to public–private educational partnerships across Africa. In this arrangement, the state does not abdicate responsibility; rather, it shifts from direct management to a regulatory and enabling role, setting standards, monitoring compliance, and ensuring equity, while allowing institutions with proven track records to handle day-to-day administration. In Edo State, the Catholic Church’s education boards have the human capital, institutional memory, and social capital necessary to revitalise struggling schools. Their dense community networks — parish communities, alumni associations, and philanthropic partners — often provide the resources, mentorship, and accountability mechanisms that overstretched government bureaucracies may not sustain.
Concerns about displacement — of both staff and students — are legitimate, and they must be met with clear, compassionate policy measures. Teachers who have served faithfully in these institutions should be absorbed into other government schools without loss of status. Students should be relocated in a way that preserves their academic progress, with priority given to ensuring that no learner drops out as a result of the transition. The government’s moral and statutory duty to protect these stakeholders does not diminish simply because managerial control shifts to another entity.
At the end, the choice is not between maintaining a mismanaged status quo and abandoning the state’s responsibility. It is between allowing mediocrity to persist in the name of uniformity and pursuing excellence through partnership. The return of these four schools to the Catholic Church is, in this light, a prudent measure that combines historical restitution with strategic governance reform. When accompanied by transparency, inclusivity, and accountability, such partnership promises to restore quality, discipline, and moral purpose to institutions that once set the standard for education in Edo State. The task now is for government and mission authorities to ensure that the transition is smooth, fair, and firmly anchored in the public interest — for it is ultimately the children of Edo, and the society they will shape, who stand to gain the most from this return.
Fr. Dr. Okhueleigbe Osemhantie Ãmos is a priest of the Catholic Diocese of Uromi and a Lecturer at the Catholic Institute of West Africa Port Harcourt Nigeria
Comments are closed.