Earlier this year, Nigeria’s Supreme Court affirmed that the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act applies across all levels of government reinforcing citizens’ right to access information. We recently spoke with President Aigbokhan, Esq. – lead counsel in the case and a valued member of our global network of press freedom lawyers – about this positive judgment and its broader impact.
On 11 April 2025, the Court held that the FOI Act binds not just federal ministries, departments, and agencies (MDAs) but also all 36 state governments.
The judgment overturns a 2018 Benin City Court of Appeal decision that had confined the Act’s application to federal institutions – effectively entrenching widespread non-compliance at the state level.
The Supreme Court’s decision underlined that the FOI Act was enacted to promote transparency, accountability, and public participation in governance – principles that they declared must not be constrained by jurisdictional boundaries.
“Our laws must work for all,” said President Aigbokhan, Esq., lead counsel for the appellants. “This decision represents a step forward for democratic governance, with implications for the protection of citizens’ rights at the state level.”
A Challenge Rooted in the Right to Receive Information
The case stemmed from a 2014 information request by a coalition of civil society organisations to the Edo State Agency for the Control of AIDS (EDOSACA). The groups sought financial records related to the HIV/AIDS Programme Development Project (HPDP II), including expenditures, grants, donor contributions, and contract awards between 2011 and 2014.
After EDOSACA refused to comply, the organisations took the matter to the Federal High Court, which ruled in their favour. However, the Edo State government appealed successfully, limiting the Act’s scope – until the Supreme Court’s reversal.
A Long Road to Transparency
Nigeria’s journey to a Freedom of Information law was hard-won. The first draft of the FOI Bill was produced in 1993 by Media Rights Agenda (MRA), the Civil Liberties Organisation (CLO), and the Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ). Although Parliament passed the bill in 2007, it was vetoed by then-President Olusegun Obasanjo. It was only after a further four years of advocacy that President Goodluck Jonathan finally signed the FOI Act into law on 28 May 2011, making Nigeria the second West African country after Liberia to do so.
Nevertheless, actual implementation has proven inconsistent at best. A 2023 report by a coalition of civil society organisations revealed that more than 170 federal MDAs had violated the Act, that year alone, by ignoring information requests. Media Rights Agenda had also warned that low federal budget allocations and a lack of political will continued to cripple FOI enforcement.
At the state level, compliance has been even more elusive. Many governors argued that the FOI Act, being federal legislation, did not bind them without specific state versions of the law. The Supreme Court’s latest ruling seeks to close that loophole, clarifying that transparency obligations are not optional for state governments.
The Broader Context: Freedom of Expression in Nigeria
In 2025, Nigeria ranks 122 among 180 countries in RSF’s World Press Freedom Index. Nigeria’s ranking reflects ongoing concerns about journalist safety, with at least five Nigerian journalists currently in detention as of June 2025.
In addition to personal safety, the Nigerian government has made multiple attempts to restrict press freedom through legislative efforts over the past decade. Prohibitive legislation, including the Cybercrime Act of 2015 and the anti-Social Media Bill of 2019 has raised significant concerns among civil society and press freedom advocates. While authorities claim these measures aim to enhance cybersecurity and combat disinformation, the bills have instead contributed to a shrinking space for public discourse.
Amendments to the Nigerian Press Council Act and the National Broadcasting Commission Act in 2021 have similarly intensified the chilling effect on the media and enabled greater state overreach. Investigative journalists in particular, remain exposed to legal threats, particularly for reporting on politically sensitive issues such as corruption and embezzlement. The challenge lies in strengthening legal frameworks to concurrently provide adequate protection for journalists and promote transparency.
A Step Toward Accountability
“This is not just a legal victory – it is a victory for democracy,” said Aigbokhan,
who dedicated the success to the network of NGOs and activists in Edo State who continued to fight for justice over nearly a decade of litigation.
By reaffirming that open governance is a national standard, not a matter of local discretion, the Supreme Court has bolstered the constitutional right to hold power to account.
Yet, it remains to be seen whether this will translate into tangible improvements in access to information. Structural obstacles – including political resistance and limited institutional capacity – may continue to hinder compliance, especially at the state level.
Media Defence supported this case through our Emergency Defence Programme. If you are a journalist facing threats for your work, you can get help here.
