-
Lagos Federal High Court rules FG, 36 States, FCT have a legal obligation to provide free, compulsory basic education.
-
Court declares Sections 2(1) & 11(2) of the UBE Act enforceable and binding on all governments.
-
Judge says failure to access N68bn UBE Fund is unwise but not illegal if states still fund basic education.
The Federal High Court in Lagos has delivered a landmark ruling confirming that the Federal Government, the 36 states, and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) are legally required to provide free, compulsory, and universal basic education for every Nigerian child of primary and junior secondary school age.
The judgment, delivered on October 9, 2025, by Justice D.E. Osiagor, followed a suit filed by human rights lawyers Femi Falana (SAN) and Hauwa Mustapha on behalf of the Alliance on Surviving COVID-19 and Beyond (ASCAB). A certified true copy of the ruling was obtained on Wednesday, according to Tayo Soyemi of Falana & Falana Chambers.
ATTENTION: Click “HERE” to join our WhatsApp group and receive News updates directly on your WhatsApp!
In the suit, the Federal Government, the 36 states and the FCT were listed as respondents.
Justice Osiagor affirmed that Section 11(2) of the Universal Basic Education (UBE) Act imposes a binding statutory duty on all tiers of government to ensure free and compulsory basic education. However, he clarified that the decision of states to access federal matching grants under the UBE scheme remains discretionary.
The court ruled that any state choosing to participate in the UBE funding mechanism must comply strictly with the requirement to contribute 50% counterpart funds before drawing from federal allocations. Failure to access these grants, the court held, “does not per se amount to illegality,” as Section 11(2) is “directory and conditional, not mandatory.”
Justice Osiagor noted he had carefully reviewed all affidavits, written addresses and statutory authorities presented by both sides, including the UBE Act 2004 and the 1999 Constitution.
Applicants Have Legal Standing — Court
On the first issue, the court held that ASCAB and its representatives have the legal standing to bring the matter. Justice Osiagor stated that public interest litigation allows a more liberal interpretation of locus standi, especially where issues affect vulnerable groups such as children, widows and orphans.
The applicants, he said, demonstrated legitimate concern over educational rights and the failure of states to access available federal funds, thereby meeting the threshold for public interest standing.
Right to Basic Education Is Enforceable
On the second issue, Justice Osiagor declared that the right to free, compulsory and universal basic education under the UBE Act is enforceable and justiciable. He dismissed arguments that the right to education is non-justiciable under Section 18 of the Constitution, ruling that the UBE Act creates statutory obligations that cannot be ignored.
The judge cited examples from jurisdictions such as India and Pakistan, where similar rights became enforceable once backed by legislation.
States’ Refusal To Access UBE Fund Not Illegal — Court
On the third issue, the court examined whether states violated Section 11(2) by failing to provide the 50% counterpart funds needed to access the N68 billion UBE Fund.
READ ALSO: Court Declines Request to Move Nnamdi Kanu to Abuja for Appeal Records
Justice Osiagor ruled that although states have a statutory duty to provide basic education, they are not legally compelled to draw from federal assistance. The Act treats federal contributions as support, not an enforced mandate.
He stressed, however, that a state becomes liable only if it fails entirely to provide basic education as required under Section 2(1) of the Act and the Child Rights Laws in each state.
“The refusal of States to access available education funds may be unwise or undesirable from a policy standpoint, but it is not illegal.
“The statutory duty is to provide free, compulsory and universal basic education; the Act does not make federal assistance the compulsory means of achieving this goal,”Justice Osiagor ruled.
