CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2011

The Freedom of Information Act was enacted a few years ago, to promote, enhance and
develop our precarious democracy. The Act (which is an expansion of Section 39 of
the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria), was signed into law on 28th
May, 2011 by the President Goodluck Jonathan administration. The purpose of the Act
is to make public records and information more freely available, provide for public
access to public records and information, protect public records and information to
the extent consistent with the public interest and the protection of personal
privacy, protect serving public officers from adverse consequences for disclosing
certain kinds of official information without authorization and establish
procedures for the achievement of those objectives. The Act further spelt out ways
of getting access to records by Court, materials and documents under the security
classification. The foundation of a sound democracy involves accountability of the
Government and its agencies. It is hoped that with the enactment of the Freedom of
Information Act, this would be guaranteed.
Nigeria’s Freedom of Information (FOI) Act was signed into law after the longest
legislative debate in the history of Nigeria. The debate lasted for over 12 years.

The Freedom of Information (FOI) Act is an entrenchment that gives every citizen
the right to request public records or information within the custody of a public
institution. the Act’s grand motive is to enable unhindered access to public
documents or information to ensure transparency and accountability across all
levels of governance. Note that the freedom of information act was signed into law
on on 28th of May, 2011.

Before enacting the FOI act, Nigeria had no legal provision that guarantees public
access to records and information of public institutions.

Sections 1 and 2 of the FOI Act established the six rights provided by the Act as
follows:
1. The right to access or request any information or record in possession
of any public institution or private bodies providing public services, performing
public functions or utilizing public funds.
2. The right to be told whether the information or record exists
3. The right to have the requested information or record released if the
information or document is in the custody or possession of a public institution
4. The right not to demonstrate any specific interest or purpose in the
requested information or record
5. The right to receive information that public institutions are obliged
to proactively disclose under the Act.
6. The right to take legal action in Court to compel any public
institution to comply with the provisions of the Act, including discharging their
proactive disclosure obligations under the Act.

According to the Act, anyone using the provision of the Act to request public
information is not obliged to express any particular interest or reason for the
information requested. The Act also sets a seven-day limit for the information
requested to be made available and provides judicial proceedings in instances where
access is denied. Any public servant or institution guilty of wrongful denial of
information is liable for a 500,000 Naira fine after a judicial establishment.

While no payment is expected to be made for access to information, the FOI act
allows for an access fee when copies of information need to be duplicated or
transcribed for a fee.
As freedom is never absolute, the FOI Act’s application is not without exemptions,
which include issues of national security and international relations, law
enforcement records and court enforcement.
All in all, the Freedom Of Information Act’s enactment was no doubt a right step in
the right direction, which signals progress in the Nigerian democratic system. The
judicious use of this Act will trigger transparency and accountability across all
sectors of the government and foster economic and social development in the country
at large.

HISTORICALLY

The origin of the freedom of information laws of most countries can be traced to
the action of a man named Anders Chydenius (a Finn) about 250 years ago. During
that period, he fought for democracy, equality and respect for human rights under
the principle of public access called "OFFENTLIGHETSPRINCIPEN". This led to the
promulgation of the Freedom of
4 Forward to Toby Mendel's book on FREEDOM OF INFORMATION

Since the beginning of modern journalism in Nigeria in 1859, it has struggled to

get the necessary freedom that would enable it to fulfill its societal obligations
(Aliede,Citation 2003). Before independence, the colonial authority passed some
objectionable laws that gave rise to Nigeria’s fight for journalistic freedom. The
first newspaper, Iwe-Irohin (1859–1867), and the successive newspapers that
appeared in the 1880s led to the enactment of the Newspaper Ordinance of 1901 and
the Seditious Offences Ordinance of 1909, the first press legislation in the nation
(Yusuf, Citation 2015). Aminu in Yusuf (Citation 2015) highlighted that the British
colonial authority began to feel uneasy about the press in the early 1900s and, as
a result, began passing laws that were harsh to the press and looking for ways to
curb its excesses, particularly towards the colonial administration.
Even after gaining its independence from colonial rule on 1 October 1960 Nigeria
retained some of the objectionable press laws passed by the colonialists and went
on to enact additional strict media laws, including the Newspaper Seditious Act of
1961, the Defamation Act of 1962, the Official Secret Act of 1962, the Newspaper
Amendment Act of 1964, the State Security (Detention of Persons), Decree No. 2 of
1982, and the Public Officers (Protection Against False Accusation) Decree No. 4 of
1984 among others. All of these regulations were put in place to restrict the
press’s ability to gather and disseminate information and to prevent them from
holding the government accountable to the people (Omotayo,
Citation 2015).
It has not always been easy for journalists to gather and distribute news, mainly
because of the limited independence caused by the government’s tight control and
grip on the media. The relationship between the government and the media in
Nigeria, according to Uche (Citation 1989)has thus been described as a game of cat
and mouse. This suggests that the right to an unrestricted flow of information has
been violated. Important information has not been available to journalists, let
alone the general public. Journalists have been forced to continue snooping around
for information to provide in-depth, accurate, and fair reporting, putting
themselves in grave danger and running the possibility of being abused, imprisoned,
tortured, or even killed (Ezeah,
Citation2004).Malayo (Citation2012) says in his contribution that the need to
create a free press society has been at the forefront of national discourse,
particularly among Nigerian journalists. This is mainly attributable to the fact
that it is imperative to have legislation that ensures a high degree of press
freedom. In light of the potential benefits it could have for any society, it
becomes impossible to ignore. Freedom of information is one of the essential tools
for performing journalistic duties. According to Yusuf (Citation 2015), journalists
will undoubtedly be unable to fulfil their professional duties of informing,
teaching, entertaining, monitoring the environment, correlating, and transmitting
social legacy, as suggested by Harold Lasswell in 1948, without a proper flow of
information.
According to Mohan in Yusuf (Citation
2015), in the absence of FOI in a national legal framework, citizens cannot
effectively access information about essential services, participate fully in their
countries’ social and economic development, or hold their government responsible
for public spending. This can negatively affect their rights to health, employment,
and education, as well as their ability to fight corruption, among other things.
The difficulties caused by anti-press regulations that overpower the Nigerian
constitution have made it appear that journalists will never be able to source,
gather, and disseminate news. The Nigerian Guild of Editors report on FOIA well
captured this when it noted that:
We are mindful of the responsibilities of the press, but we cannot discharge our
function creditably unless the shackles created by repressive laws are eliminated
from our law books. The accomplishment of this goal depends on press freedom
operating without restrictions. (2001)

This explains why the press was leading the charge to get Nigeria’s freedom of
information law passed. The necessity for information to be made easily accessible
led to the movement for a Freedom of Information Act. Yusuf (Citation 2015) quoted
Ajulo thus:
It is the knowledge of the important role of access to information in determining
the collective destiny of a nation-state that birthed the agitation for Freedom of
Information Bill in Nigeria which was finally signed into law on May 29, 2011.
Therefore, it may be claimed that the fight for a free and vibrant press is
inextricably tied to the fight for information freedom.

To adequately perform their professional duties as the fourth estate of the realm
and the watchdog of society, the media needs sufficient freedom to seek out,
gather, and transmit information. Therefore, it was necessary to enact legislation
to ensure that Nigerians and journalists have access to official information, which
is why the Freedom of Information Act is being promoted (Berliner,Citation 2014).
Having known that the Freedom of Information Act became essential in the fight for
a free press, media scholars started to urge its adoption. For instance, Ogbondah (
Citation 2003) stated that the National Assembly should “enact or guarantee the
press and members of the public the right of access to government-held material,
including computerized records” before it was ever passed.
In a similar vein, the Media Rights Agenda (Citation 2004) stated thus on the FOI
bill at one point: “When passed into law as an Act of Parliament, it will make
public record and information in the custody of any government—Federal, State or
Local—available to every citizen in Nigeria”.
Freedom of Information laws, which have been adopted by more than 80 nations
worldwide, is one of the critical policies (Berliner,Citation 2014). Journalists
and the Nigerian public should both have access to information under the Freedom of
Information Act, which was anticipated to be legally enforceable. With the Freedom
of Information Act, it will be possible to obtain information from the President or
other public officials regarding any transaction that took place in those offices
(Ogbondah,Citation 2003). The law is anticipated to improve the record-keeping
practices of public institutions by ensuring that government records and documents
are correctly kept, as well as to promote the oversight role of the National
Assembly by facilitating access to public documents and information required for
the work of the National Assembly and its committees.
The National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS) document, which
calls for the adoption of an access to information law as flagship legislation
necessary for its successful implementation, also states that it is expected to
help the Federal Government realize its agenda for economic reform. As government
operations and policies are made more transparent and accessible to the general
public, FOIA will also encourage transparency and accountability in governance, as
public institutions become aware that their judgments will be made public and have
to be supported by objective and justifiable grounds. It will also ensure that
government institutions operate more effectively and more effectively
(Ogbondah,Citation 2003). The Federal Government’s anti-corruption laws (such as
the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission Act, the Independent Corrupt Practice
and Other Related Offence Act, the Prohibition and Punishment of Bribery Act, the
Code of Conduct Bureau Act, and others) will also be complemented and strengthened
by this legislation, as accountability and transparency in government are
impossible without the right of citizens to access information held by the state or
its agencies (Yalaju,Citation 2006). Above all, the FOIA is anticipated to
strengthen Nigeria’s participatory democracy by empowering citizens to make well-
informed decisions, encourage compliance, keep an eye out for policy implementation
distortions, and, where needed, raise the calibre of governmental judgments and
policies. This prospect alone will increase citizens’ feelings of ownership and
belonging while preserving public trust in the government. It is understandable why
Ogbondah (Citation
2003) asserts that “A democracy works best when the people have all the information
that the security of the nation permit, no one should be able to pull curtains of
secrecy around decisions, which can be revealed without injury to the public
interest”.
After numerous attempts, the FOI bill was later passed into law in 2011, and since
then, journalists have been required to take full advantage of the Act. This is so
that information can be made more readily available to journalists in the same way
that it would be for anybody else who requests information from public
organizations. Additionally, it is anticipated that once the law is in force, the
media will have easier access to more accurate information, which will enhance the
standard of media coverage. Yalaju (Citation 2001) in support of this writes that
“The right of access to information is aimed at strengthening the media by
safeguarding and protecting freedom of expression and the press in particular”.
The Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ), Media Rights Agenda (MRA), and Civil
Liberty Organization (CLO) were the three civil society organizations that launched
the campaign for a law of this sort, even though the Act is not a law governing
journalism (Ogbuoshi,Citation 2006). Journalists Tony Anyanwu, Nduka Irabor, and
Abike Dabiri each made one presentation of the bill to the National Assembly before
the other
(Ojebode,Citation 2011). The fact that different journalists played different roles
in the passage of the Act indicates that the practice of journalism was likely to
be affected.
But despite these efforts from the Nigerian journalists in the enactment of the
Act, researchers and media scholars found that many Nigerian journalists had not
used the FOI Act correctly (Abone,Citation
2014; Dunu & Ugbo,Citation2014; Oberiri,
Citation 2016; Omotayo,Citation 2015). This means that little has been done by
journalists to make use of the Act’s provisions for their professional dealings.
This has called for serious concerns. It may be that journalists are not fully
aware of the provisions and the potency of the Act or there may be seeming
challenges to the implementation of the Act in Nigeria. Researchers were able to
look at the knowledge and use of the Freedom of Information Act among journalists
and revealed low knowledge and use of the Act among journalists, none looked at the
challenges of implementation of the Act. The purpose of this study therefore is to
ascertain how many journalists in Nigeria, are aware of the provisions of the
Freedom of Information Act, how much they have used it to carry out their
professional responsibilities, and what difficulties they encountered in putting
the Act into practice.

Issues and Challenges of FOIA in Nigerian Journalism Practice

Some of the challenges include information access denial, legal loopholes, and
public servants needing to be aware of the Freedom of Information Act. The paper
finds that the current Freedom of Information Act 2011 offers no relief.

Only parts 1 and 3 of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) allow for public access
to information; other sections, including 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, and 26, do not.
In other words, the Act has more access restrictions than exemptions. Section 26
forbids the publication of materials kept in the federal government's national
ibrary, national museum, or archives; Section 18 forbids the publication of test
questions, examination results for employment, buildings or construction plans made
with public money, library circulation information, or any records linking users to
specific materials.

Similarly, Section 15 forbids the disclosure of any information that includes

financial information, trade secrets, proposals for contracts, grants, and
agreements, as well as environmental testing results for a public institution. A
request for information that includes the file and personal information of clients,
patients, students, residents, or people receiving financial, educational, or
vocational guidance directly or indirectly from public institutions is denied under
Section 14. A request for information about administrative proceedings, law
enforcement, or the internal workings of a public institution is denied under
Section 12. In contrast, a request for information about the conduct of
international affairs or the defense of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is denied
under Section 11.

As a result, these exemptions have made it challenging for individuals and

journalists to access information kept by the government and its institutions.
Journalists find it challenging to comprehend Section 29, which deals with national
security because it enables public officials to conceal it to suppress the public's
right to know. Because of this, only some people use the Freedom of Information Act
to acquire important information for public use. Instead of using FOIA, journalists
can more easily obtain official information through informal contacts. As a result,
it is assumed that the FOIA's provision could be more helpful.

A. Counter Legal Provisions

Legal provisions in Nigeria conflict with the Freedom of Information Act. Among
them are the Official Secrets Act, the Evidence Act, the Statistics Act, and the
Public Complaints Act. The restriction of information flow is a critical factor in
Nigeria's rising crime rate. The interference with the smooth operation of the FOIA
and the unnecessary restriction of access to crucial information that should be
made available to the public and journalists

B. Waste of Time

It takes too long to access government records in this fast-moving digital age. A
90-day response time limit applies to FOIA requests. The 90-day response period
renders information obsolete and gives public officials the discretion to thwart
FOI requests, especially those from journalists. After that, the journalist who
submitted the FOI request may seek access to the information in court. By this
time, the information might have become outdated. The cost of enforcing compliance
through the courts could be high for media companies already dealing with declining
revenue.

C. Ignorance of the FOIA by Public Servants

The Official Secret Act forces public employees to live in secrecy, and ignorance
of the FOIA's provisions encourages poor implementation. The only reason that
public employees abide by information requests is that the courts have ordered them
to. In public institutions, access to information is challenging because of a weak
culture of record-keeping and retrieval. In Nigeria, some laws are fully
functional. These laws, intended to limit the free flow of information, include the
Official Secrets Act, the Evidence Act, the Public Complaints Commission Act, the
Statistic Act, and the Criminal Code.
These laws may impact the long-term effectiveness of the Act as some corrupt public
officials may take advantage of these features. It is challenging to get
information from any government agency because of the level of secrecy. Several
laws, most notably the Official Secrets Act, prohibit civil servants from
disclosing government information. These Acts also make it unlawful to obtain or
reproduce such information.

D. Freedom of Information Act: Issues and Challenges in Nigerian Journalism

Practice.

Poor Record Management

In a survey on records management in the public and private sectors that Akor and
Oko (2015) conducted, the results revealed that both the public and private sectors
gave records management low marks. It implies that issues with record-keeping are
disregarded, and the right to information suffers as a result. It is expected that
all government information databases should be open and transparent for easy access
to information, even though technology makes it easier to implement transparency
reforms. This can have a negative impact on FOIA reforms.
Digital data and documents will only be simple to access after creation if they are
protected. When official records are kept on personal computers, emails, or social
media accounts, it can be challenging to assess them after a person retires or
leaves a specific position or organisation.

Other Challenges to the implementation of the act

This research question seeks to investigate the challenges to the implementation
of the Act among journalists . Findings in response to this question revealed that
journalists in had faced many challenges in implementing the Freedom of Information
Act, one of which was common knowledge of the Act by the journalists. This has been
a severe challenge to implementing FOIA in Nigeria, as revealed by many
researchers. Yusuf (
Citation 2015) identified ignorance of the content of the Freedom of Information
Act as one of the hindrances to using the Act. It is least expected of a journalist
with little or no knowledge of FOIA to use it to access information in government
custody.
Another challenge, as revealed by the finding of this study, is that other laws
hindering press-free access to information are still operational. This is true
because we still have the Official Secrets Act, Evidence Act, the Public Complaints
Commission Act, the Statistics Act and the Criminal Code, all aimed at suppressing
the free flow of operational information. These laws affect the implementation of
the Act as some mischievous public officers may use them for their selfish
purposes. Oberiri (Citation 2017) noted that the continuous existence of anti-press
laws aimed at suppressing the free flow of information would continue to affect the
proper implementation of FOIA in Nigeria. Similarly, Oduah (Citation 2015 ) averred
that “it is not yet Uhuru (over) for the Nigerian press, as their supposed freedom
to ‘free access to and publication of information is still gagged and fettered not
only by various successive governments of the day but, most pathetically, the same
laws that ought to be the saviour”. In support of this finding, Enonche (Citation
2012) noted that the continued existence of these laws might affect the Act’s
effectiveness in the long run as some mischievous public office holders can use
some aspects of the laws for their selfish purposes.
The perception that the Act is not workable unless it is domesticated in Kogi State
is also considered a challenge in the implementation of the Act among journalists
in Kogi State. The respondents considered the issue surrounding its domestication
before it was operational in a given state as a significant setback in implementing
the Act. This is because there were reports of a court order in states like Lagos,
Enugu, Katsina, Oyo and Benue that the Act does not apply to states until it is
domesticated and passed to law by the State House of Assembly. Journalists in Kogi
State considered this challenge to implementation of the Act as far as Kogi State
is concerned.
Yusuf(Citation 2015) also identified the unsettled issue of the domestication of
the Act by states as a factor responsible for the non-utilization of FOIA in North
West Nigeria.
The issue of widespread corruption and a high level of ignorance of the Act among
the workforce in the public sector was also considered a challenge. This is also a
significant setback to implementing the FOIA as no government of the day will
freely allow the public to be aware of their callous policies and secret deeds.
Journalists on their part lack commitment to understanding the content of the Act
and utilizing them in carrying out their professional responsibilities. This is so
because 10 years after the bill establishing FOIA in Nigeria was passed into law,
there was little commitment by the journalists to studying and using the Act. Only
a few of the journalists (11 out of 48) took their time to study the Act even
though the majority of them knew such a law existed, and only five out of the 48
journalists studied made an attempt to use the Act.
Also as identified by the respondents, is the unwillingness of public office
holders to give out information. About this finding, Collins (Citation2003) in
Oberiri (Citation 2016) noted that a right to access officially held information
would inevitably enhance good governance, transparency, accountability and people’s
participation in government. However, the great fear is that public office holders
may not want to divulge information capable of exposing their secret fraud.
The challenges in the implementation of FOI laws are not limited to only Nigeria.
Most African countries are faced with one challenge or the other. Chidi and Max in
Yusuf (Citation 2015) noted that “although the legal texts vary from country to
country, the problems confronting the implementation of FOI laws in various African
countries are similar in many ways”. The authors identified technical capacity as a
major constraint to the implementation of FOI laws on the continent. They noted
that in some countries, such as Uganda, delays in the preparation of implementation
regulations required by their respective access to information laws stalled the
effective implementation of the law for nearly five years, until the regulations
were eventually established by the government with the support of civil society
actors in the countries.

ADVANTAGES

This Act makes public records and information more freely available, provide for
public access to public records and information, protect public records and
information to the extent consistent with the public interest and the protection of
personal privacy, protect serving public officers from adverse consequences for

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 2011 affects everyone, every issue and every
aspect of daily life. Freedom of Information is the foundation for open system of
governance in Nigeria. It is important to the healthy functioning of our society
and would directly impact the quality of life of people residing in Nigeria. It
would foster an open and participatory system of governance where the government,
public and private institutions contribute to and benefit from healthier, more
transparent collaborative governance.

It must come first because our right to speak freely is a prerequisite for all of
our other freedoms—and for living in a free society. Without freedom of speech,
there is no preacher in the pulpit, no defense at a trial. Without freedom of
speech, we cannot cast our vote or call our representatives.

HOW WILL THE FOIA HELP MAKE LIFE BETTER FOR YOU?
• Everyone can access any information or record, subject to
specific exemptions, in the custody of any public institution or private
institution utilizing public funds, performing public functions or providing public
services.
• Everyone is entitled to receive a request for information
within seven (7) days.
 • Everyone will enjoy open access to information on issues
such as health and social development projects, public procurement and public
budgeting, public private partnership projects, asset declaration of serving public
officials, etc.
• Everyone can monitor the level of service delivery from
government and their effectiveness in all areas including social policies, projects
and policies, maternal, neo-natal and other medical care services, basic education
and poverty eradication programmes.
• Everyone can now learn how budgetary allocations to repair,
provide for, or fund public utilities such as hospitals, roads, power, potable
water, etc. in the community are utilized and ensure that the right persons are
held accountable for non-or shoddy performance.
• Communities can ensure the protection of their local
environment through adequate information, enabling them to advocate against
projects and programmes that negatively affect the local environment and
livelihoods
• Communities and citizens will have access to information
with which to determine whether or not they receive value-for-money for public
works projects and investments.
• Government and the general public alike can now monitor the
allocation and flow of scarce public resources to ensure that there is equitable
distribution of development projects across the country.
• Parliament can access information and records with which to
conduct its oversight role more effectively.
• Legislators will have authentic information necessary to
make good laws and enhance their ability to effectively perform their legislative
oversights duties.
• Business owners will be able to assess risks and operate
their businesses more efficiently as they gain better understanding of
complementary investments, competition or risk factors.
• Contractors bidding for contracts can determine whether the
award of such contracts followed the necessary due process stipulated in existing
public procurement processes, regulations and legislation.
• Farmers can gain information as to how much support they
receive from government with respect to investments in farm nutrients and
implements and also understand where these are deployed and for whose benefit.
• Budget administrators can more efficiently track where
funds in the budget have been allocated and how much has actually been spent.
• Journalist and the press can ensure that they do factual
reporting, eliminating a culture of rumour and conspiracy; and encouraging informed
and healthy public debate.
• Grant administrators will have access to how research grant
allocations to academic and other charges they pay daily to provide sanitation,
security and other facilities in the market.
• Policy makers will have access to reliable information from
which they can distil empirical data for evaluating the successes of government
policies and modifying them where necessary.
• Students, researchers and academia can access accurate and
legitimate data for important researcher projects
• Career professionals can benefit from the creation of jobs
in the management of public records: the FOIA will provide new revenue streams for
consultants involved in public policy formulation, information management, policy
research, dispute resolution, compliance officers, auditors and accountants as well
as legal practitioners, amongst many others.
• Nigerians can exercise their electoral franchise from an
informed position, inspiring them to become more active participants in the civic
process.
• Anti-corruption measures will be complemented by the FOIA
and anti-corruption agencies would be better resourced to carry out the fight
against corruption.
• The public will have the necessary confidence and assurance
about whether or not governance works for the people and, if not, who is
responsible.

Conclusion
The FOIA Bill was first proposed in 1999, like a broken hope. After all, these Acts
did not provide the relief that was anticipated. This Act is outside the public's
best interests because it grants exemptions in more crucial public interest areas
than in general need areas. The absence of immunity or any specific rights or
protections for journalists renders the provisions of the Act insufficient. The Act
puts journalists' hopes for a free press in jeopardy. The press places the most
emphasis on the exemption sections (Sections 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 18, 26, 28 and
29), particularly Section 29, which emphasizes the confidentiality of the
classified documents.

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) has allowed citizens to access information
free from any public institution (though there are some exceptions). It is
sufficient for the general public, who only needs this information in one or two
isolated cases of public interest. However, journalists frequently need many data
to do their jobs. This calls for more protection or coverage. Should journalists
still have access to sensitive and secret documents?

The press's social responsibility role will be fruitless once the legislators
decide it is necessary to compel the government to grant it the independence it
needs to effectively carry out its watchdog function. The Freedom of Information
Act (FOIA) should be updated to reflect current circumstances, especially regarding
exemptions, other legal provisions, and the promptness with which official FOIA
requests are communicated to requesters. Journalists and other interest groups
should lead these amendments in the national assembly. In line with that, this
paper suggests the following:

Senior government employees who hold the information requested by the public should
receive updated training on the FOIA's rules so they can respond to requests for
information appropriately. Public officials' ignorance of the provisions of FOI
laws, particularly regarding what information should be in the public domain, ranks
among the world's most severe problems with these laws.

There should be administrative sanctions in addition to the statutory legal

penalties for public officials who unnecessarily refuse access to public
information protected by the FOIA. The penalty will deter them from hiding behind
national security or official secrets clauses, summarily rejecting FOI requests,
wasting time trying to thwart FOI requests, or otherwise withholding information
from the public.

The Newspaper Proprietors Association of Nigeria (NPAN) and the Nigerian Union of
Journalists (NUJ), should include FOI awareness and application as part of their
regular training for journalists in order to make FOI a more effective tool of
trade.