FOCUS : The SFAR scholarships mix-up

The initially stranded students at the National University of Rwanda (NUR) and other institutions of higher learning entered this month with bright smiles on their faces. Reason? President Kagame intervened in their plight and secured for them scholarships which SFAR had initially denied them. Over 1500 students from ten universities got stranded in their respective universities after their names missed out on the new SFAR (Student Financing Agency of Rwanda) scholarship list. This happened when they had already reported for school. Following this the students from NUR lodged a petition to the Ombudsman’s office and the senate, with overwhelming evidence pointing to their innocence in this whole mix-up, calling upon all the different levels to intervene and listen to their problem. The students consequently formed a committee to follow up the issue on behalf of other affected students from NUR. Start of the mix-up The students saw their names in the Invaho Nshya, a Kinyarwanda newspaper as the selected students as it has been traditionally done for students who have been short listed for government sponsorship. These lists came out months before they even went for Ingando, a solidarity camp. So they prepared themselves and actually did all the necessary registrations and preparations for university studies. But alas, a few weeks after reporting, SFAR released another list where of all the 7602 whose names appeared in Invaho Nshya, not more than 600 appeared. The students claimed that many of them with the required marks as provided for in the Ministerial order who were equally needy missed out on the new lists and many were taken to universities they did not apply for, thereby asking what criteria was actually followed. The core problem SFAR in its denial of the scholarships to these students based on the provisions of the Ministerial order, which says that for one to qualify for a scholarship he or she has to be having a ‘satisfaction’ or ‘good’ in sciences and a ‘distinction’ in any other subjects. It also considers a person who has attained a ‘satisfaction’ or ‘good’ and being admitted to pursue higher education in education. The students claim that this order came out months after they had already applied for the schools. The order came out on the 3rd of September yet they had applied in March of the same year. They also claimed that some students who scored the required marks and applied for both scholarship and specific universities were left out while others with lesser marks were given scholarships. Ministerial order subjective In the letter to the Ombudsman the students wondered why in the first place they were taken to UNR yet the selecting committee was well aware of the order and its provisions. “They should have put us in the institutions where our grades fit as provided by the order. For instance they could have sent us to Mutara Polytechnique where 39 was a distinction, since they were aware of both the order and results,” the letter read. “We are completely puzzled about what these people followed in awarding scholarships. Besides the fact that this order came out six months after we had applied, it is highly subjective at the time it would have treated all institutions the same,” noted Philemon Mugabo the head of the committee for affected students from NUR. “Why is it that a person in Butare who scored 44 out of 60 is not allowed to continue studying yet one in Mutara polytechnique with 39 is taken as distinction and is given a scholarship yet we studied the same course. Does it mean this order treats universities differently?” he questioned. In the letter the students wrote to the ombudsman, copied to different levels including the president’s office, which the New Times obtained, the students claim the process followed in awarding scholarships this time was unbelievably strange. “What normally happens is that if a person doesn’t qualify for the first choice institution he or she applied basing on grades, the person is given the second choice if at all the grades he scored allow. If still he doesn’t fit he or she is considered for the third choice, but this wasn’t followed yet they knew we had applied. Why didn’t they follow this procedure in allocating universities well knowing we applied before the order was out,” reads part of the statement. Confusions and inconsistencies They further claimed that there are some students who didn’t apply for UNR but were taken there and on reaching there they were also sent away, hence missing out on even the universities they applied for when they even have the points fitting there. “This is completely unfair, you dint apply to a place they take you there on starting studies they stop you and chase you, ending up missing even the university you applied for which you even have the required points….yet others with far lesser marks are studying,” reacted Isaac Matsiko, one of the affected students. Kagiraneza Issa Musa who applied for KIE ended up being sent to UNR only to be stopped later yet he got the points required to study on scholarship in KIE where he applied.In an earlier interview with the then Director General of SFAR, Emmanuel Muvunyi, he said the students had mistaken the admission lists which came out in Invaho for SFAR scholarship selected students. But the students who this paper talked to responded that much as coming out in Invaho doesn’t guarantee scholarship, it shows that a person scored enough points for that particular university. “We agree coming out in Invaho doesn’t guarantee a scholarship because after there SFAR gives us a form to show our economic background…where if one is proven needy he or she is considered, this has nothing to do with points. Why then does SFAR attribute our omissions on low points?” asked a visibly exasperated student. The Invaho Nshya story which came out on 2nd match 2009 indicated that 7602 students out of the 30,000 and above who passed qualified for government scholarship and the students are claiming these are the ones who came out in the latest Invaho Nshya lists. This is one of the evidences the students fronted to all the levels they sought redress from. With this year’s problem solved, there are still questions on what exactly happened, there is need to follow up in time and establish what went wrong such that such hiccups don’t happen again. Ends