Freedom of Information (FOI) Act applicable to 36 states, Supreme Court rules

The judgement marks a watershed moment for the 14-year-old statute, whose implementation has been hampered by the country’s lack of commitment to transparent and democratic administration.

The Supreme Court declared on Friday that Nigeria’s Freedom of Information (FOI) Act covers all levels of government, including state institutions.

Contrary to several state governments’ arguments over the years to avoid compliance with the FOI Act, a federal statute, the court ruled that the National Assembly had the authority to adopt rules governing public documents and archives.

The court determined that the topic is within the scope of the Constitution.

The judgement marks a watershed moment for the 14-year-old statute, whose implementation has been hampered by the country’s lack of commitment to transparent and democratic administration.

One of the many techniques used by public institutions and their executives to avoid compliance with the law is to claim that federal law does not apply to states.

Despite admitting their legal obligations, numerous federal organisations ignore Freedom of Information requests without consequence.

The lawsuit that led to Friday’s Supreme Court decision was brought on January 6, 2014, by a coalition of civil society organisations in response to the Edo State Agency for the Control of AIDS (EDOSACA)’s refusal of a FOI request.

The applicants requested complete information for the HIV/AIDS Program Development Project (HPDP II), including financial expenditures, grants, donor partnerships, contract awards, and grant allocation criteria from 2011 to 2014.

The applicants, dissatisfied with the state agency’s actions, sought judicial review from the Federal High Court. The court found the applicants in favour, but the state administration filed an appeal with the Court of Appeal, Benin Division.

The Court of Appeal reversed the verdict, ruling that the statute did not apply to the states.

However, the Supreme Court’s decision on Friday overruled the Court of Appeal’s 2018 majority finding, which concluded that the FOI Act only applies to federal ministries, departments, and agencies (MDAs).

President Aigbokhan, the applicants’ primary counsel, praised the decision when it was handed down.

“This is not just a legal victory—it is a victory for democracy,” Mr Aigbokhan stated. “This decision is a major step forward for the global campaign for probity, accountability, and transparency, with far-reaching implications for public citizens at the sub-national level.” Our laws must work for everyone. Once again, the Supreme Court has proved its critical role as a true arbiter of democratic ideals.

The Media Rights Agenda (MRA), the Civil Liberties Organisation (CLO), and the Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ) collaborated in 1993 to create the initial draft of the FOI bill. With the consolidation of democracy in 1999, a private member’s bill to enact a Freedom of Information Act was introduced in the National Assembly.

The measure passed through the National Assembly in 2007, but former President Olusegun Obasanjo declined to sign it into law. When provided to his office, Mr Obasanjo simply returned “the FOI Act” to the sender.

Many misconceptions welcomed the measure, paving the way for a larger Freedom of Information Coalition. The group launched statewide mobilisation campaigns and sensitisation efforts in support of the bill, arguing that a FOI law would promote democracy and improve good governance.

The Nigerian media dominated the FOI campaigns. Many media outlets serialise the bill’s content to increase public support.

Despite widespread support, the National Assembly took twelve years to pass the access-to-information law.

On May 28, 2011, President Jonathan signed the measure into law, making it an act of parliament. Nigeria became the second West African country to enact a FOI law, following Liberia in 2010.

But for years, several of Nigeria’s 36 states refused to implement the act, claiming it was a federal law that did not apply to them. Today’s Supreme Court decision has removed that impediment.