There is a conversation that happens regularly in Nigerian barbershops, on construction sites, in the backrooms of offices, in the private corners of owambe parties after the second bottle has been opened and the pretence of propriety has been loosened by palm wine and pepper soup and the comfortable darkness of male company. It is a conversation about women — specifically, about the women who are not the wife. It happens with the easy, unguarded fluency of men discussing something they consider settled, something they have reached a collective understanding about that requires no further examination.
Infidelity, in these conversations, is not a crisis. It is a climate.
It is discussed not with the language of moral failure but with the language of appetite — as though it is simply a feature of the male condition, as natural and as inevitable as hunger, requiring management rather than elimination. The man who has never cheated is regarded, in some of these circles, with a mixture of suspicion and mild pity — as though his fidelity is either evidence of limited opportunity or an unexamined naivety about how the world actually works.
This article is not going to have that conversation. It is going to have a different one — the one that almost never happens in those barbershops and backrooms and owambe corners. The honest one. The one that goes beneath the cultural bravado and the collective normalisation and the carefully maintained mythology of male appetite, and asks the questions that the mythology is designed to prevent: why, really? What is actually driving this? What are the real causes — the psychological ones, the cultural ones, the relational ones, the historical ones — behind a pattern of behaviour that is causing documented, measurable damage to Nigerian families, Nigerian children, and Nigerian society? And what, if anything, can be done about it?
Truth be told, this conversation is overdue. It has been overdue for a very long time. And the reason it is overdue is not that Nigerians do not care about the damage infidelity causes — most do, deeply. It is that the conversation has been consistently framed in ways that prevent genuine examination. It has been framed as a moral condemnation — which produces defensiveness rather than reflection. It has been framed as a women’s problem — which misidentifies where the primary work needs to happen. It has been framed as a religious failing — which is true as far as it goes, but does not go far enough into the specific, addressable causes that lie beneath the spiritual dimension.
This article is going to go further. Not to condemn. Not to preach. But to understand — because understanding is always, in the end, the beginning of change.
Let Us Start With the Numbers: How Widespread Is This Really?
Before examining causes, intellectual honesty requires an acknowledgement of the evidential landscape — what we actually know, from available data, about the prevalence of infidelity in Nigerian marriages and relationships.
Precise, nationally representative statistics on infidelity in Nigeria are difficult to obtain for obvious reasons — the subject is stigmatised, self-reporting is unreliable, and large-scale academic studies on sexual behaviour in Nigeria are relatively limited compared to the scale of the population. What does exist, however, is instructive.
A 2015 study published in the African Journal of Reproductive Health examined sexual behaviour among married men in Lagos State and found that a significant proportion — in some sub-groups, approaching or exceeding fifty percent — reported having had extramarital sexual partners in the preceding twelve months. The Nigerian Urban Reproductive Health Initiative and various public health studies focused on HIV transmission patterns have consistently documented high rates of concurrent sexual partnerships among Nigerian men across different demographic groups. The National Agency for the Control of AIDS has, for years, identified multiple concurrent partnerships as one of the primary drivers of HIV transmission in Nigeria — a public health framing that strips the issue of its social performance and presents it in the cold language of epidemiology.
Beyond the formal data, there is the anecdotal evidence that accumulates from the lived experience of Nigerian families — the divorce petitions that cite adultery, the family courts where the consequences of infidelity are processed, the churches and mosques where marriage counsellors navigate the aftermath, the hospitals where the sexually transmitted infections that accompany infidelity are treated. This evidence is not systematic, but its volume and consistency across different contexts and regions tells a story that the formal data, incomplete as it is, broadly confirms.
Now see this: the purpose of citing this data is not to shame Nigerian men collectively — the majority of whom, it must be said, are navigating genuine moral commitments in difficult circumstances and deserve that acknowledgement. The purpose is to establish that the conversation this article is having is not about marginal behaviour. It is about a pattern that is widespread enough to constitute a genuine social phenomenon requiring serious examination.
Cause One: A Culture That Has Quietly Normalised What It Publicly Condemns
Here is the first and perhaps most foundational cause — the one that makes all the others possible and gives them their specific Nigerian texture. Nigerian culture, in its public posture, condemns infidelity. The church condemns it. The mosque condemns it. The family condemns it — at least when it is happening to their daughter rather than being committed by their son. The social script, when asked directly, is clear: infidelity is wrong, marriage is sacred, the faithful husband is the ideal.
But beneath this public posture, there exists a parallel cultural script — unwritten, rarely stated explicitly, but communicated through a thousand small signals — that treats male infidelity as, if not admirable, then at least understandable. Expected. A predictable feature of the male condition that women would be naive to deny and unwise to press too hard against.
This parallel script is communicated in the advice given to young brides: “all men are like that, just manage him.” It is communicated in the distinction drawn between a wife — the legitimate, respected, primary partner — and other women, who occupy a different category entirely and whose existence, while not officially acknowledged, is tacitly accommodated. It is communicated in the laughter that greets certain jokes in male company, in the winks and nudges that are the social currency of a culture that has learned to simultaneously condemn a behaviour and celebrate it, depending on the audience.
This cultural double standard is not merely hypocritical — it is actively harmful. Because a man who has absorbed, from childhood, the message that his infidelity is a natural expression of his masculinity that his community privately expects and accommodates is a man who has been robbed of the moral framework that genuine accountability requires. He has been given permission — not in words, but in the far more powerful language of cultural normalisation — to do the thing that the words say is wrong.
The Nigerian pastor who preaches against adultery on Sunday morning and is known to keep a girlfriend is not merely a hypocrite. He is a product of a culture that has never resolved the contradiction between its stated values and its lived ones — and that unresolved contradiction is transmitted, generation by generation, through exactly these kinds of models.
What would it take to close the gap between the public condemnation and the private accommodation? It would require men speaking to each other — in those barbershops and backrooms — with the same honesty that they speak about the behaviour itself. It would require the cultural conversation to shift from managing infidelity to genuinely challenging the normalisation of it. This is not a small ask. But it is the foundational one.
Cause Two: The Emotional Unavailability That Was Built Into Nigerian Boyhood
Let us face it: most Nigerian men were raised without the emotional vocabulary or the relational skills that a genuinely intimate, sustained, monogamous partnership requires. This is not an accusation. It is an observation about the specific content of the socialisation that most Nigerian boys received — and the specific gaps that socialisation created.
Nigerian boyhood, in the traditional and even many contemporary models, is a training in emotional suppression. The boy who cries is corrected. The boy who expresses fear, vulnerability, uncertainty, or tenderness in contexts that are not strictly approved is gently or not so gently redirected toward the performance of strength. “Be a man.” “Big boys don’t cry.” “Handle it.” The message, delivered consistently across different contexts and by well-meaning people, is that the interior emotional life — the feelings, the needs, the vulnerabilities, the desires for connection and comfort — must be managed inward, not expressed outward.
The young man who emerges from this training is not emotionally dead. He has feelings. He has needs. He has the same deep human hunger for genuine connection, for being truly known, for intimacy in its fullest sense, that every human being carries. But he has no language for these things. No practice in expressing them. No comfort with the kind of sustained emotional vulnerability that genuine intimacy requires. He has been trained, in the most fundamental sense, for performance rather than presence.
Now here is the connection to infidelity that is rarely made explicit: when a marriage requires emotional intimacy — when a wife wants to be genuinely known, wants her husband to be genuinely present, wants the relationship to have depth and warmth and real vulnerability — and the husband cannot provide it, not because he does not care but because he was never taught how — the marriage develops an emotional deficit. A gap. And that gap, over time, generates disconnection, frustration, and a generalised relational dissatisfaction that neither partner knows how to name or address.
For some men, that gap is where other women enter. Not primarily because of physical desire — though that is part of it — but because the other relationship, unburdened by the weight of shared history and domestic responsibility and children and bills and accumulated disappointments, offers something easier. Something that does not require the emotional depth that the marriage is demanding. Something that asks for less of the interior self that the man has never learned to offer.
The infidelity, in this reading, is not merely a moral failure. It is a symptom of an emotional development gap — a gap that was created in boyhood by a cultural system that valued performance over presence, and that is now expressing itself in the most intimate and most damaging context available.
The implication of this analysis is significant: if emotional unavailability is a root cause of infidelity, then the intervention must go to the root. It must address not merely the behaviour but the emotional formation that precedes and produces it. It must create space — in families, in schools, in churches and mosques, in the broader cultural conversation — for Nigerian boys to develop the emotional vocabulary and relational skills that their fathers and grandfathers were not given. Not as a sacrifice of masculinity but as its completion.
Cause Three: The Marriage That Was Never Designed for Genuine Intimacy
Here is a cause that requires courage to name — because it implicates not just individual choices but the entire architecture of how Nigerian marriages are typically constructed and what they are primarily designed to achieve.
In the traditional Nigerian framework — across most ethnic groups, with regional variations — marriage has historically been primarily a social and economic institution rather than an intimate one. It is the formal arrangement through which families are joined, lineages are continued, social status is consolidated, and the biological and practical future of a community is secured. These are genuine and important functions. But they are not the same function as intimate partnership — the deep, daily, mutually sustaining connection between two specific people who have chosen each other for the entirety of who they are.
The courtship process in many Nigerian traditions was not designed to assess compatibility for intimate partnership. It was designed to assess suitability for the social and economic functions of marriage. Is she from a good family? Is he able to provide? Are the families compatible? These are legitimate questions — but they are not the same questions as: do these two people have the relational capacity to sustain genuine intimacy over decades? Do they communicate in compatible ways? Do they share the values and visions that will allow them to navigate the inevitable conflicts of shared life? Do they genuinely know and choose each other as individuals, beyond the social roles they are about to occupy?
When a marriage that was selected primarily on social criteria encounters the daily reality of intimate partnership — when the families have gone home and the two people are left alone with the actual human beings they married rather than the social roles — the gap between expectation and reality can be significant. And a marriage in which two people are genuinely mismatched for intimate partnership, but socially matched for the institutional functions of marriage, will produce a particular kind of quiet misery — the misery of two people who are, in every external measure, doing the right things, and yet experience their marriage as a hollow rather than a home.
This is not a universal experience — many Nigerian marriages that began as social arrangements have deepened into genuine intimacy through the years of shared life. But it is common enough to be a significant factor in the equation. The man who married primarily because it was time to marry, who selected primarily on the basis of social criteria, who never developed genuine emotional intimacy with his wife because the marriage was not constructed to produce it — that man is more vulnerable to the particular temptation of infidelity than the man who chose his wife with the full consciousness of choosing a genuine intimate partner.
Cause Four: The Ego Architecture of Nigerian Masculinity and the Conquest Narrative
Now see this. There is a specific dimension of Nigerian male socialisation that must be named directly, even though naming it will make some readers uncomfortable — because discomfort in the right place is the beginning of the kind of honest examination that actual change requires.
For many Nigerian men, sexual conquest is not merely an appetite. It is a language — a primary medium through which masculine worth, power, and status are expressed and confirmed. The number of women a man has been with, the quality of those women by whatever criteria his peer group uses, the ability to attract and secure women beyond the primary relationship — these are, in many male social contexts in Nigeria, genuine currencies of status. They are not universally celebrated openly — but they are far more widely rewarded privately than the public condemnation of infidelity suggests.
This conquest narrative did not arrive from nowhere. It has roots in pre-colonial social structures in which polygamy was a marker of wealth and status — in which the number of wives a man could sustain was a direct expression of his economic power and social standing. The colonial period disrupted but did not erase these structures. Christianity and Islam introduced different moral frameworks — but their introduction did not automatically replace the deep cultural architecture that the conquest narrative inhabits. What resulted, in many cases, was the institutional adoption of monogamy alongside the persistent cultural reward of the conquest orientation — producing exactly the double standard we discussed in Cause One.
The man who cheats for reasons of ego and conquest is different, psychologically, from the man who cheats from emotional unavailability or marital disconnection. He is not primarily looking for intimacy that his marriage does not provide. He is primarily seeking confirmation — a repeated, external validation of his masculine worth through the currency that his socialisation has taught him matters most. The infidelity is less about the other woman than it is about himself — about the particular version of himself that the conquest confirms.
This cause is the hardest to address because it requires the most fundamental reorientation — not merely of behaviour but of the entire framework through which masculine worth is assessed. It requires a culture that begins, seriously and consistently, to define male value in terms that have nothing to do with conquest — in terms of the depth of character built, the quality of relationships sustained, the integrity maintained under pressure, the genuine leadership demonstrated in family and community. These are not soft standards. In many ways, they are harder to meet than the conquest standard. But they are the standards that build something — families, communities, futures — rather than merely demonstrating something.
Cause Five: Opportunity Structures and the Specific Temptations of Nigerian Professional Life
Let us be practical for a moment — because causes that are purely psychological or cultural, without an accounting of the specific environmental contexts in which infidelity occurs, leave an important part of the picture unpainted.
The structure of Nigerian professional life creates specific opportunity contexts for infidelity that deserve honest examination. The long commutes that mean many Nigerian men spend significant time away from home in contexts where they are known only professionally — where the accumulated history and complexity of home life is absent, and where a simpler, more flattering version of themselves is available. The business travel. The late nights in the office or at the client’s location. The professional entertaining. The conferences and training programmes that remove people from their domestic context for extended periods.
These are not causes in themselves — millions of people navigate these contexts faithfully every day. But they are opportunity structures — environments in which the specific temptations of infidelity are more readily available, in which the social controls that operate in the domestic and community context are absent, and in which the rationalisation of occasional transgression is easier to construct and maintain.
Beyond professional contexts, there are the specific opportunity structures created by economic inequality. The man whose economic position gives him access to a world that his wife — for reasons of time, resources, or social context — does not share. The power differential between an employer and an employee, a landlord and a tenant, a lecturer and a student, a patron and a beneficiary — these differentials, in a society with significant economic inequality and inadequate accountability structures, create opportunity for exploitation that frequently takes the form of transactional infidelity.
This last point deserves particular emphasis — because the transactional dimension of much Nigerian infidelity involves not merely moral failure on the part of the man but the exploitation of economic vulnerability on the part of women who are, in many cases, not choosing freely but navigating constrained options in a system that has not provided adequate economic alternatives. This is a structural issue as much as a personal one, and any serious examination of Nigerian infidelity must include an honest acknowledgement of it.
Cause Six: The Unaddressed Marital Problems That Become the Justification
Here is a cause that requires balance — because naming it risks being misread as placing responsibility on wives for their husbands’ infidelity. That is not the argument being made. Let the record be absolutely clear: infidelity is the choice of the person who commits it, and no circumstances within a marriage create an obligation or a justification for that choice. A man who is unhappy in his marriage has options — conversation, counselling, separation, divorce — that do not involve betrayal. The infidelity is always his choice.
That said — and with that clarity firmly established — it is also true that unaddressed marital problems are frequently cited by men who cheat as the context in which the infidelity developed. And understanding that context, without using it as an excuse, is part of the honest examination this article is committed to.
Sexless marriages — whether the result of physical health issues, emotional disconnection, the exhaustion of young parenthood, or the gradual drift of a couple that has stopped prioritising each other — are frequently cited. Not because sexual deprivation is a justification for infidelity, but because it is a genuine relational problem that, unaddressed, creates a specific vulnerability that a less than fully committed person will eventually act on.
Chronic conflict — the marriage in which every interaction is shadowed by unresolved grievance, in which the atmosphere of the home is consistently tense, in which both partners have effectively given up on genuine connection and are merely coexisting — creates a different but equally significant vulnerability. Not because unhappiness justifies betrayal, but because the man who has concluded, rightly or wrongly, that his marriage cannot provide what he needs is less likely to invest the effort of fidelity in protecting something he no longer believes in.
The honest implication of this cause is not that wives need to do more to prevent their husbands from cheating. It is that both partners in a marriage have a genuine responsibility to address marital problems proactively and honestly — not because failure to do so makes infidelity acceptable, but because unaddressed problems compound, and compounding problems create the kind of marital environment in which the commitment that fidelity requires is hardest to maintain.
Cause Seven: The Spiritual Vacancy That Nobody Wants to Name
This article has been, by deliberate design, examining causes that are psychological, cultural, social, and structural — because these causes are real and require serious engagement, and because the purely spiritual framing of infidelity, while not wrong, frequently short-circuits the kind of specific examination that practical change requires.
But any honest examination of why Nigerian men cheat that does not include the spiritual dimension is, finally, incomplete. Because at the root of every one of the causes examined in this article — beneath the cultural normalisation, the emotional unavailability, the ego architecture, the opportunity structures, the unaddressed marital problems — there is a spiritual vacancy. A failure of the kind of character formation that genuine faith, genuinely lived, produces.
Genuine faith — not the performance of religiosity that is one of Nigeria’s most abundant exports, but the actual, interior, daily, costly living of one’s professed beliefs — produces a specific kind of character. A character that understands integrity as non-negotiable not because transgression is always detected but because character is formed in the undetected moments. A character that understands that the covenant of marriage is not merely a social contract but a sacred one — witnessed and held by God, carrying weight that exceeds any human social consequence. A character that has done the genuine internal work of subjugating the appetites to the values, not once dramatically but daily, in the small decisions that nobody sees and that together constitute the person you actually are.
Proverbs 6:32 states the biblical verdict with unusual directness: “But a man who commits adultery has no sense; whoever does so destroys himself.” Not merely damages his marriage. Not merely hurts his wife. Destroys himself. The language is not about social consequence — it is about the interior destruction that infidelity produces in the person who commits it. The fracturing of integrity. The construction of a double life that requires the daily, exhausting maintenance of deception. The gradual erosion of the capacity for genuine intimacy — because a person who is hiding something fundamental from their primary partner cannot be genuinely present with that partner, and the habit of concealment, practised long enough, damages the capacity for transparency that all genuine intimacy requires.
Job 31:1 records Job’s famous declaration of personal integrity: “I made a covenant with my eyes not to look lustfully at a young woman.” A covenant with his eyes. Not a resolution made at the moment of temptation. A prior commitment, made in a moment of clear-headed intentionality, that governed the behaviour before the temptation arrived. This is the spiritual discipline that fidelity requires — not merely the willpower to resist temptation in the moment, but the prior formation of character that makes the resistance a matter of identity rather than effort. The man who has decided, before the temptation presents itself, who he is and what he will and will not do — that man has done the most important work that fidelity requires.
What the Research Says About the Real Cost: The Data Nobody Is Reading
The conversation about infidelity in Nigeria is almost always conducted in moral and emotional terms. What it rarely includes is the cold, practical, measurable accounting of what infidelity actually costs — in economic terms, in public health terms, in child development terms — because the full accounting, presented honestly, makes the casual cultural normalisation of the behaviour significantly harder to sustain.
Psychologists at the University of Denver, in research published in the Journal of Family Psychology, found that infidelity is cited as a primary cause in approximately fifty percent of all divorces. In the Nigerian context — where divorce, while increasing, still carries significant social cost and where the decision to divorce is frequently delayed far beyond the point at which the marriage has functionally ended — the actual proportion of marriages damaged by infidelity is likely higher than the divorce statistics capture.
The impact on children is documented with particular clarity in the developmental psychology literature. Children who grow up in households affected by parental infidelity demonstrate elevated rates of anxiety, depression, academic underperformance, and difficulty forming trusting attachments in their own adult relationships. They are more likely to experience infidelity in their own partnerships — either as perpetrators or as victims — because the template for intimate relationships that was formed in their childhood normalised betrayal as a feature of the relational landscape.
The public health cost — the HIV and STI transmission associated with the concurrent sexual partnerships that characterise much Nigerian infidelity — has been extensively documented by health researchers and carries a burden that extends far beyond the individuals involved to their spouses, their future children, and the healthcare systems that manage the consequences.
The economic cost — the financial diversion from the marital household to the maintenance of extramarital relationships, the legal costs of divorce proceedings where they occur, the reduced economic productivity associated with the mental health consequences of marital betrayal — has not been systematically calculated for the Nigerian context, but the components are visible and real.
What Genuine Change Requires: The Honest, Practical, Culturally Grounded Answer
This article has been building toward this section — because examination without direction is ultimately a sophisticated form of hand-wringing. What does genuine change actually require?
It requires honest male conversation. The barbershop conversation needs to change — not through external imposition but through the courage of individual men who are willing to say, in those spaces, what they actually believe rather than what the performance of masculinity requires. The man who says, in a group of his peers, “I am faithful to my wife and that is not weakness — it is the choice of a man who has decided what kind of person he will be” is doing more for the culture of Nigerian marriage than a thousand sermons delivered to audiences who already agree.
It requires better emotional formation of Nigerian boys. Parents — and particularly fathers — who are reading this article carry an immediate, practical responsibility. The boy you are raising right now is being formed, by everything you model and everything you say and everything you silently permit, in his understanding of what manhood means in relation to women. What is he learning from watching you? What is he learning from the jokes you laugh at, the conversations you have, the way you speak about his mother, the way you treat the women in your life? The formation is happening. The question is what it is forming.
It requires honest marital culture. Couples who prioritise genuine communication — who create the conditions for honest conversation about needs, disappointments, disconnections, and desires before those things fester into the unaddressed problems that become infidelity’s context — are doing the preventive work that fidelity in the long run requires. This means the uncomfortable conversations. The ones that risk short-term conflict in the service of long-term intimacy. The ones that are easier to avoid and far more costly to avoid than to have.
It requires genuine accountability structures. The man who knows that his community, his church, his mosque, his family — the people whose opinion of him he genuinely values — will hold him genuinely accountable for the gap between his stated values and his lived behaviour is less likely to maintain that gap indefinitely. This requires communities willing to move beyond the performance of moral concern to its actual practice — which means private accountability, not merely public condemnation.
It requires the personal decision. Ultimately — beneath all the cultural causes, all the emotional deficits, all the structural vulnerabilities — there is a man making a choice. In the moment that matters, with the temptation fully present and the opportunity fully available, one man at a time makes a decision. And that decision — like all genuinely significant human decisions — is not primarily determined by culture or psychology or opportunity, though all of these influence it. It is determined by character. By the person the man has decided, in the quiet and private laboratory of his daily choices, to be.
Who are you deciding to be?
A Word for Students Reading This
If you are a young Nigerian — a student who is forming, right now, the relational patterns and the character architecture that will define your intimate life for decades — this conversation is not abstract for you. The habits of character that you build or fail to build in these years of formation will follow you into every relationship you will ever have. The integrity you practice now, in the small choices that nobody sees, is the integrity that will sustain you — or fail to sustain you — when the much larger choices arrive.
Build well. Study hard. Become the full version of yourself — academically, personally, characterologically. If you are preparing for Post UTME, WAEC, NECO, GCE, JUPEB, Pre-degree, or School of Nursing entrance examinations — and your goal is admission into Obafemi Awolowo University Ile-Ife, University of Ibadan, University of Nigeria, University of Lagos, University of Calabar, University of Ilorin, or any other leading Nigerian institution — Akahi Tutors, based in Ile-Ife, provides the focused, expert preparation environment that serious students need. Call 08038644328 or WhatsApp wa.me/2348038644328 today. Your character and your education are both being built right now. Invest in both.
The Final Word: This Is Not a Condemnation — It Is a Call
This article has not been written to condemn Nigerian men. It has been written to take them seriously — which is, ultimately, a more respectful posture than the one that either excuses the behaviour with cultural determinism or condemns it with moral performance while leaving the root causes unexamined.
Taking men seriously means believing that they are capable of more than the cultural script assigns them. It means believing that the man who has been formed by a culture of normalised infidelity is not therefore doomed to perpetuate it — that human beings have the capacity to examine the scripts they have inherited, to assess them honestly against the values they genuinely hold, and to choose differently.
Hebrews 13:4 states the divine standard with simple clarity: “Marriage should be honoured by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral.” This is not a threat designed to produce compliance through fear. It is a statement about the weight that the marriage covenant carries — the seriousness with which the God who designed human intimacy regards its protection. The man who understands this weight does not experience fidelity primarily as a restriction. He experiences it as an expression — of his values, his character, his love for his wife, and his relationship with the God who made him capable of all three.
The conversation this article started in the barbershop will eventually end. The men will go home to their families, their responsibilities, their marriages, their children. And in the quiet of those homes — in the private space where the performance has no audience — each man will be alone with the person he actually is.
Who is that person?
The answer to that question is not fixed. It is being written, right now, in the choices that nobody sees. And it can change — not easily, not without cost, but genuinely and permanently — for any man who decides that the story he has been living is not the story he wants to finish.
That decision is available. Today. To every man reading this.
Make it.
This article has gone to places that most conversations about infidelity in Nigeria never reach. If it has given you language for something important — something you have been thinking about, something someone you love needs to hear — do not let it stay on this page. Share it. On WhatsApp, on social media, in the conversations that matter. The culture changes one honest conversation at a time, and every share is an invitation to that conversation.
Follow Akahi News every day for journalism that takes the hard topics seriously — that goes past the surface, past the performance, past the comfortable and the obvious, to the honest, specific, actionable truth that actually serves the people reading it. We are here. Every day. Writing for you.
Written by Joseph Iyaji, Senior Journalist, Akahi News
🎓 Attend 2026 JAMB, Post-UTME, WAEC, and NECO GCE Tutorials
Get fully prepared with expert tutors, comprehensive study materials, and personalised academic guidance at Akahi Tutors.
📍 Located at 67, Oduduwa College Road, Off Sabo Junction, Ile-Ife.
📞 Call: 08038644328
for enrollment and accommodation reservation.