Key Takeaways
- Ghana Scholarships Secretariat‑sponsored PhD students in the UK have rejected a proposed oath‑taking exercise announced by the Ghana High Commission, calling it discriminatory and unnecessary.
- Students argue that their existing bond forms and scholarship award letters already bind them to return to Ghana after study, making a new oath redundant.
- The leadership highlights chronic delays in tuition‑fee and stipend payments, with some beneficiaries left without funds for months and facing eviction.
- They question the applicability of the newly enacted Ghana Scholarship Authority Act, 2025, to awards made under the former Secretariat and criticize the misinterpretation of the Oaths Act, 1972.
- The students demand clear payment timelines, assurances that return to Ghana will not be enforced before dues are settled, guarantees of labour‑market reintegration, copies of any signed documents, and a shift to an online validation process to reduce costs.
- Additional concerns include the continued issuance of Letters of No Objection (LONO) for UK work experience despite official criticism, and undisclosed tuition‑fee payment arrangements with certain UK universities.
- The student leadership urges the Ghana High Commission and the Ghana Scholarship Authority to engage in dialogue, address the outlined grievances, and resolve the dispute before any oath‑taking exercise proceeds.
Background of the Scholarship Program and Current Dispute
The Ghana Scholarships Secretariat has long sponsored Ghanaian PhD candidates pursuing studies in the United Kingdom, requiring recipients to sign bond forms that commit them to return home after completing their programmes. In early August 2025, the Ghana High Commission in the UK announced a new oath‑taking exercise intended to reaffirm that commitment. The announcement was disseminated via social media and invited students to attend unspecified venues across the country. Student representatives immediately expressed alarm, viewing the initiative as an abrupt departure from established procedures and a potential source of additional burden on already strained beneficiaries.
Student Leadership’s Rejection of the Oath‑Taking Exercise
In a statement released on Friday, August 7, the leadership of the sponsored PhD student body declared its outright rejection of the proposed oath‑taking activity. They characterised the exercise as discriminatory and unnecessary, arguing that it imposes an extra layer of obligation without clear justification. The statement emphasized that the students had already fulfilled their contractual duties through the bond forms signed at the outset of their awards, and that imposing a fresh oath undermines the credibility of those original agreements.
Legal and Procedural Concerns Regarding Bond Forms
The students pointed out that their scholarship award letters and accompanying bond forms already contain explicit clauses governing progression, renewal, and the eventual return to Ghana. They noted that the Ghana Scholarship Secretariat conducts an annual progress review—typically carried out remotely—to verify academic advancement and to renew scholarship letters. Given that this review process has functioned satisfactorily for years, the leadership questioned why a physical oath‑taking ceremony would now be deemed necessary, especially when the bond forms remain legally binding.
Financial Hardships and Delayed Stipends
Beyond the oath controversy, the student leadership highlighted severe financial distress among beneficiaries. They alleged that several students have gone months without receiving their statutory tuition‑fee stipends, leaving them unable to cover basic living expenses. The delay, they argued, appears to be a deliberate tactic by scholarship managers to postpone payments, exacerbating precarious situations. Some recipients reported receiving eviction notices from their accommodations, rendering them homeless and further complicating any attempt to attend a physical validation event.
Questions About the Application of the Ghana Scholarship Authority Act 2025
The statement also raised concerns regarding the invocation of Section 31 of the Ghana Scholarship Authority Act, 2025, to govern students whose scholarships were awarded under the former Ghana Scholarships Secretariat. The learners observed that this regulation did not exist at the time their award letters were issued, making its retrospective application legally dubious. They urged the authorities to clarify which legislative framework actually applies to their awards and to refrain from imposing new requirements that were not part of the original scholarship contracts.
Discrimination Concerns Compared to GETFund and GNPC Scholars
Another point of contention was the perceived selectivity of the oath‑taking exercise. The students noted that other Ghanaian scholars in the UK—those funded by the Ghana Education Trust Fund (GETFund) and the Ghana National Petroleum Corporation (GNPC)—had not been summoned to participate in similar oath‑taking activities. They argued that excluding these groups while targeting only the Scholarships Secretariat cohort renders the measure discriminatory and undermines the principle of equal treatment among all state‑sponsored students abroad.
Demands for Clarity and Safeguards Before Participation
The leadership outlined a set of preconditions that must be met before any student would consider joining the oath‑taking exercise. These include: a transparent timeline for the settlement of all outstanding tuition fees and stipends; an assurance that students will not be compelled to return to Ghana until those payments are fully cleared; guarantees of appropriate reintegration into the Ghanaian labour market after graduation; and the provision of a completed copy of any document signed during the oath ceremony. They stressed that fulfilling these conditions is essential to protect students’ rights and to restore trust in the scholarship administration.
Call for Cost‑Effective Online Validation
In the interest of fiscal responsibility, the students urged the scholarship management to minimise expenditure by reverting to an online validation process. They proposed using accessible platforms such as Google Forms for the submission of progress reports, bond‑form confirmations, and any required declarations. This approach, they argued, would eliminate travel costs, reduce administrative overhead, and accommodate students who are currently unable to afford transportation due to delayed stipends.
Impact of Homelessness and Evictions on Ability to Attend
The statement further elaborated on the dire living conditions faced by many beneficiaries. With several students having been evicted from their rented accommodations, the leadership emphasized that expecting them to travel to undisclosed venues for a physical oath‑taking exercise is both unreasonable and inhumane. They warned that forcing homeless students to incur additional expenses for travel and lodging would deepen their financial crisis and could jeopardise their academic progress.
Questions About Letters of No Objection and University Fee Arrangements
The students also sought clarification on two ancillary matters. First, they questioned why the Scholarship Authority continues to issue Letters of No Objection (LONO) for scholars seeking two‑year hands‑on work experience in the UK, despite the Director‑General having publicly criticised the arrangement on radio and television. Second, they expressed bewilderment over reported agreements between the scholarship management, the Ghana High Commission, and certain UK universities—such as the University of Nottingham and the University of Birmingham—whereby only a 10 % tuition‑fee payment is purportedly covered. They asked whether these arrangements were made without proper consultation of the affected students and whether they align with the original scholarship terms.
Appeal for Dialogue and Resolution
Concluding their statement, the student leadership appealed to the Ghana High Commission and the Ghana Scholarship Authority to engage in open, transparent dialogue. They requested that all outstanding issues—particularly the oath‑taking exercise, delayed payments, the applicability of recent legislation, and the alleged discriminatory scope—be addressed promptly. Only after these concerns are satisfactorily resolved, they affirmed, would they consider participating in any future validation or oath‑related activities, thereby ensuring that the sponsorship programme continues to support Ghanaian scholars without compromising their welfare or rights.