A Federal High Court sitting in Gombe on Thursday ordered the Gombe Geographic Information System (GOGIS) and its immediate past Director-General, Kabiru Usman Hassan, to release documents relating to the redesign of the Shehu Abubakar District Layout and pay N200,000 as costs to the applicant, Nafi’u Abubakar.
Justice Amina Mohammed, who presided over the matter at Federal High Court No. 1, delivered the judgment after finding that the respondents violated the provisions of the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act, 2011 by failing to respond to the applicant’s request within the period prescribed by law.
The court granted Reliefs 1, 2, 3 and 4 sought by the applicant, but declined Reliefs 5 and 6, except for awarding N200,000 as costs.
The suit, filed on January 8, 2026 by the applicant’s counsel, Barrister M. U. Faruk, was brought pursuant to Sections 1, 2, 4, 7 and 20 of the Freedom of Information Act, 2011. Barrister Musa Adamu Kumo represented the respondents.
The applicant had asked the court to determine whether, under the FOI Act, he was entitled to access public documents relating to the award of the contract for the redesign of the Shehu Abubakar District Layout.
Among the documents sought were the list of companies that expressed interest in the project, copies of advertisements or calls for expressions of interest, bids submitted, the name of the successful contractor, contract value, evidence of payment, letters of award and acceptance, and the project profile.
The applicant also sought declarations that GOGIS’ failure to provide the information within seven days violated Sections 4 and 7 of the FOI Act and that the agency was legally bound to release the requested documents or provide written reasons for any refusal.
In its judgment, the court held that the applicant made a valid Freedom of Information request which was received by the respondents on December 9, 2025.
Justice Mohammed stated, “The court finds that the applicant made a valid Freedom of Information request which was duly received by the respondents on 9 December 2025.”
The judge further held that the respondents failed to prove they had responded to the request within the statutory period.
According to the judgment, “The respondents failed to establish that Exhibit R1 was ever served on the applicant and, in any event, failed to respond within the statutory period prescribed by the Act. Consequently, the respondents failed to discharge their statutory obligation under Sections 4 and 7 of the Freedom of Information Act and are deemed, by operation of law, to have refused the applicant’s request.”
The court answered all three questions raised in the originating summons in favour of the applicant.
Justice Mohammed declared, “The applicant is entitled to access the information and documents requested in his Freedom of Information request dated 9 November 2025 and served on the respondents on 9 December 2025.”
The court also ruled that the respondents’ failure to either provide the requested information or communicate lawful reasons for refusing access within the prescribed period amounted to a breach of the FOI Act.
The judge consequently ordered GOGIS and its Director-General to release all relevant information and documents within 14 days from the date of the judgment.
The court said, “An order is hereby made directing the respondents to provide to the applicant, within fourteen (14) days from the date of this judgment, all information and documents in their custody relevant to the request. Where any of the requested information is unavailable or exempt from disclosure under the Act, the respondents shall furnish the applicant with written reasons specifying the basis for such non-disclosure in accordance with Section 7 of the Freedom of Information Act.”
However, the court declined the applicant’s claim for N100 million in general damages and N5 million as the cost of the action.
Explaining the decision, Justice Mohammed held that the objective of the FOI Act is to promote transparency and public accountability rather than award punitive damages.
The judge stated, “The primary purpose of the Freedom of Information Act is to secure access to information and promote accountability in public institutions, not to provide a basis for punitive enrichment. In this instant case, the applicant has not placed before the court sufficient material establishing any special injury, pecuniary loss, or exceptional circumstances warranting such an award.”
The court relied on the Supreme Court decision in Iyere v. Bendel Feed and Flour Mill Ltd. (2008) in refusing the claim for general damages while awarding N200,000 as costs in favour of the applicant.
