Amnesty International Wants States To Domesticate FOI Law

ABUJA, July 24, (THEWILL) - Amnesty International has called on state governments to “as a matter of law and principle embrace the Freedom of Information Act and ensure its direct application to their states.”

This position was contained in a statement by Dr Kolawole Olaniyan, legal adviser at Amnesty International in London.

The statement reads in part: “Bad government thrives in the dark—a truth it would seem President Goodluck Jonathan understood when, defying conventional wisdom, he signed into law the Freedom of Information Act (FoI) Act.”

“President Jonathan did what the previous government could not or would not do. One only has to look at the way Jonathan’s mentor, former President Olusegun Obasanjo, initially handled the FoI Act. President Obasanjo repeatedly promised to sign the FoI bill into law but backtracked citing unsubstantiated infringements on ‘national security’.”

“Openness, once denied, is now a right.”

“Nevertheless, the growing resistance or lukewarm attitude by many of the 36 states of the federation to apply the law now casts doubt on its enforcement and the hope of reversing years of official corruption, under-development and lack of respect for internationally recognized human rights.

“Already, it has been reported that one group, Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, is testing the FoI Act in court to ensure its direct application to all the states of the federation. Amnesty International will back any such initiative if the case does go to court.”

“Some state governments and senior lawyers have argued that unless states themselves pass the FoI Act it will only apply to the federal government and not the states. They cited Schedules 4, 5 and 6 of the Concurrent List of the 1999 Constitution as the legal basis for this viewpoint.

“This will hardly come as a surprise to many, especially given the well-documented concerns about the absence of transparency and accountability in many of the states during the Obasanjo administration.”

Olaniyan maintained that “It is true that Schedules 4, 5, and 6 grant powers to both the federal and state governments to make laws relating to archives and public records. But by the application of the legal doctrine of covering the field, the signing of the FoI Act into law ipso facto renders it unnecessary for any of the 36 states to take any further action on the matter.  The Act has now become binding throughout the federation.”
He said, “The plain language of the law makes it clear: there is no room for any of the 36 states of the federation to circumvent it. As such, the states would be deemed to have been ousted from the field. This position is backed up by several judgments of the Supreme Court of Nigeria.

“There are fundamental principles of human rights and democracy at stake, ones that no elected state governments should be seen to undermine or impede. Moreover, the FoI Act is so vital to the effective functioning of Nigeria that no serious government should contest its direct application within its state.

“The direct application of the FoI Act to the 36 states of the federation will not burden the states but rather strengthen the legal and institutional framework for democracy, human rights, transparency and accountability within the states’ borders.”

According to him, “The FoI Act promises access and transparency, a new contract between government and the people it governs. It guarantees the people of Nigeria’s right to request information on the activities of government from the various ministries, offices or other sources, whether or not such information is contained in any written form.”