The Federal High Court in Lagos has issued a landmark ruling that places a clear legal duty on the Federal Government, the 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory to provide free and compulsory basic education to all Nigerian children of primary and junior secondary school age.

Justice D. E. Osiagor delivered the judgment on October 9, 2025, following a suit filed by human rights lawyer Femi Falana SAN and activist Hauwa Mustapha. Both applicants filed the action on behalf of themselves and the Alliance on Surviving Covid-19 and Beyond. A certified copy of the decision was recently made available.

According to court records, the Federal Government, all 36 state governments and the FCT were listed as respondents.

Court affirms enforceability of basic education rights

In his decision, Justice Osiagor held that Section 11(2) of the Universal Basic Education Act (UBE Act) imposes a statutory obligation on every tier of government to ensure free and compulsory basic education within their jurisdictions. However, he clarified that while this obligation is binding, participation in the Federal Government’s matching grant scheme remains voluntary.

The judge explained that any state wishing to draw from the Universal Basic Education Fund must first provide the required 50 percent counterpart contribution. He noted that this requirement is activated only when a state chooses to access the fund.

“I hold that Section 11(2) is directory and conditional, not mandatory, and that failure to access the Federal block grant does not per se amount to illegality,” the judgment read.

Justice Osiagor stated that the right to basic education, though originally placed under the non-justiciable Directive Principles in the 1999 Constitution, became enforceable once the National Assembly enacted the UBE Act in 2004. “Once Parliament has enacted a law imposing obligations, those obligations become enforceable,” he ruled.

Legal analysts say this distinction is significant because it confirms that states can now be held accountable in court if they fail to provide basic education, even if they choose not to access federal grants. According to education policy researcher Dr. Tunde Adebayo, “The ruling reinforces that the responsibility for basic schooling cannot be waived. Whether through their own resources or federal assistance, states must deliver.”

Court upholds locus standi of applicants

A central issue in the suit was whether the applicants had the legal standing to sue. Justice Osiagor answered in the affirmative.

Citing evolving judicial positions on public interest litigation, he noted that Nigerian courts have increasingly adopted a liberal approach when fundamental public rights are at stake.

Falana, he observed, is a Senior Advocate and long-time human rights advocate, while both applicants demonstrated genuine concern for access to education. The court also pointed out that the case concerns millions of Nigerian children and draws attention to unused federal education grants.

“The Applicants have sufficient interest and thus possess locus standi to institute this action,” he ruled.

States not compelled to accept federal grants, but still must fund education

The court further examined whether states are acting illegally by failing to provide counterpart funding required to access approximately N68 billion in unclaimed federal education grants.

The applicants argued that Section 11(2) makes the 50 percent contribution mandatory and that states’ refusal has contributed to high rates of out-of-school children.

Some states, including Lagos, countered that participation in the grant programme is optional because the federal contribution is described in the law as “assistance.” They insisted that states cannot be penalised for declining such assistance.

Justice Osiagor agreed with that interpretation, noting that the law includes no penalty for refusing the grants. He held that the requirement becomes binding only when a state voluntarily chooses to participate.

“It follows that the failure of a State to access the Federal matching grant may be unwise or undesirable from a policy perspective, but it is not, in itself, illegal under Section 11(2) of the UBE Act,” he said.

However, he stressed that states remain fully obligated to fund and provide free basic education by other means, in line with Section 2(1) of the UBE Act and various Child Rights laws.

Education advocates say the ruling exposes a recurring challenge. According to a 2024 UNESCO report, Nigeria accounts for more than 20 million out-of-school children, the highest in the world. Groups such as the Human Development Centre say the judgment should compel governments to prioritise education financing.

What the ruling means going forward

The decision clarifies that Nigerian children have an enforceable right to free, compulsory basic education and that governments at all levels will be expected to meet this obligation, whether or not they rely on federal funding.

Several analysts believe the ruling may influence future budget debates and could open the door for civil society groups to hold state governments accountable if public schools remain underfunded.

“The court has effectively drawn a line,” said constitutional lawyer Adaobi Nwachukwu. “States may refuse federal assistance, but they cannot refuse their duty to Nigerian children.”