By Ayo Kehinde
A lawyer, Vincent Ottaokpukpu, has approached the Federal High Court in Abuja seeking an order to nullify the N1.5 billion fee demanded by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) for the issuance of Certified True Copies (CTCs) of the National Register of Voters and the full list of polling units across the country.
In a suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2228/2025, Ottaokpukpu is asking the court to declare the sum imposed by the electoral body as “excessive, exploitative, null and void”. He also wants the court to determine a fair cost for the electronic certification and production of the requested documents.
On October 8, the legal practitioner wrote to INEC under the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act, 2011, requesting certified copies of the national voters’ register and the list of polling units in all electoral wards nationwide.
INEC, in its reply dated October 13, granted the request but demanded N1,505,901,750 as the cost of production. The commission also cited its internal guidelines, which fixed the cost of certified true copies (CTCs) at N250 per page, claiming that the documents requested would amount to 6,023,607 pages.
Dissatisfied with the fee, Ottaokpukpu filed the suit by himself, naming INEC as the sole defendant. He is seeking eight reliefs, including an order directing the commission to produce electronically certified copies of the documents onto external hard drives at a fair cost to be determined by the court. He also urged the court to order INEC to send the copies electronically to his email address — Ottaokpukpul2@gmail.com — once he pays the fair amount as assessed by the court.
The plaintiff further prayed for a declaration that the N1.5 billion charge constitutes a denial of his right to information under the FOI Act and that INEC’s guideline fixing the cost of N250 per page is “arbitrary, exploitative, unfair, and unlawful.”
Ottaokpukpu, in his supporting affidavit, stated that he had represented several clients in election-related matters as petitioners and respondents, hence the need for access to the national voters’ register ahead of the 2027 general elections.
He said he was aware that INEC had already fixed February 20, 2027, for the presidential and National Assembly elections, and March 6, 2027, for the governorship and state assembly polls, with off-season elections expected in Anambra, Osun, and Ekiti before then.
According to him, INEC’s justification for the B1.5 billion fee is baseless since the documents already exist in digital form, and producing certified electronic copies should not attract such prohibitive costs.
Ottaokpukpu maintained that document duplication costs in Abuja and other parts of Nigeria typically range between N30 and N50 per page, depending on volume, and argued that INEC’s assessment is grossly inflated.
He also alleged that the so-called INEC guidelines relied upon to justify the cost were neither gazetted nor publicly available, questioning their legality. He contended that INEC, being a public institution funded by taxpayers, is not a revenue-generating agency for itself or the federal government.
The lawyer noted that INEC’s 2025 budget, which stands at about N126 billion, already covers overheads such as printing materials, computers, and photocopying equipment; hence, the additional cost is unjustified.
He, therefore, contended that unless the court intervenes, INEC’s action would amount to a deliberate attempt to frustrate citizens’ access to public information through financial barriers, contrary to the spirit of the FOI Act.
