Abstract

The scope of concurrent legislative powers under Nigeria’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 2011 has generated sustained controversy, reflected in a series of judicial decisions marked by inconsistency and uneven enforcement. This paper interrogates the intersection of federal and state legislative authority over the FOIA. Adopting a doctrinal methodology, the study traces the historical evolution of the FOIA, analyses judicial interpretations of its applicability, and situates these within the constitutional framework governing concurrent legislative powers. It highlights how federal supremacy and state resistance have produced legislative anarchy, often to the detriment of citizens’ access to information. Comparative insights are drawn from the United States and Kenya, whose federal systems offer more coherent models of concurrency and cooperative governance. The paper argues that Nigeria requires clearer constitutional delineation and judicial fidelity to textual interpretation to avert legislative anarchy. It recommends that State Houses of Assembly confine themselves to procedural frameworks that facilitate implementation rather than enacting duplicative or conflicting statutes.