Media Rights Agenda (MRA) today condemned the recent call by the Executive Secretary of the Nigeria Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (NEITI), Dr. Orji Ogbonnaya Orji, for an amendment to the Freedom of Information Act, 2011 to impose punitive measures on “fake CSOs” allegedly “misusing” the law to blackmail public institutions, describing the call as an attempt to discredit the Act and weaken it.
In a statement issued in Lagos, MRA said such a proposal is not only ill-conceived but deeply troubling as it undermines the spirit and purpose of the FOI Act, which was enacted to guarantee a right of access to information, promote transparency, and combat corruption, adding that “suggesting punitive measures based on vague, subjective and unsubstantiated claims of ‘misuse’ poses a huge risk of the Act becoming a tool for silencing journalists, researchers, civil society actors, as well as other citizens and members of the public who legitimately seek information.”
MRA’s Programme Officer, Ms Ayomide Eweje said in the statement “We reject any narrative that seeks to criminalize the exercise of a fundamental right under the guise of protecting public institutions. The appropriate response to concerns about abuse of the FOI Act, even if such concerns are legitimate, is institutional transparency, including routine compliance with the Act by all public institutions to ensure its effective implementation and rigorous enforcement of the current mechanisms for ensuring compliance so that no public institution or official is put in a vulnerable position where they can be blackmailed.”
She described as illogical NEITI’s claim that “fake NGOs” had hijacked the FOI Act and were using it to blackmail public institutions, arguing that since every person has a right to request information under the Act, there is no need for anyone to pretend to be representing a non-governmental organization, whether fake or genuine, in order to use the Act; and that when public officials disclose any information requested from them, there is no way they can be blackmailed as any information that is obtained from any public institution under the FOI Act is effectively information that is publicly available and has no blackmail value.
Besides, Ms Eweje noted, if public institutions have grounds for withholding requested information, they also cannot be blackmailed for denying such requests for information as they will be standing on solid ground, adding “you can only complain of blackmail if you have done something wrong or even criminal, in which case the appropriate response should not be to amend the Act to protect public officials or institutions engaged in wrongdoing or criminal activities.”
She observed that blackmail and extortion are already criminal offences contained in various Federal and State laws in virtually all the States of the Federation and that there is no conceivable reason why anyone using the FOI Act to blackmail public institution or officials or to extort money or other favours from them cannot be prosecuted under the existing criminal laws without amending the FOI Act to introduce the offences into it.
Ms Eweje said it was particularly disappointing that such a call was coming from the head of NEITI, an agency created to deepen accountability in the extractive sector and strengthen public trust, adding that “Dr. Orji’s position contradicts the global standards of openness that NEITI claims to uphold and could damage the credibility of the agency both locally and internationally.”
She urged that instead of seeking to discredit the FOI Act or weaken it, NEITI and other public institutions should commit to full compliance with their disclosure obligations under the Act, build internal capacity to manage FOI requests efficiently and speedily, and promote a culture of openness as a tool for building public confidence in public institutions and government in general.
Ms Eweje declared that MRA and its partners across different sectors and stakeholder groups all over the country remain committed to defending the FOI Act against any attempt to dilute its provisions and effectiveness or to punish citizens and other members of the public for exercising their rights under the Act.
