By Correspondent in Abuja.
The Nigeria Data Protection Commission (NDPC) has asked the Federal High Court in Abuja to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Meta Platforms Inc., challenging a $32.8 million remedial fine and eight corrective orders imposed for alleged violations of Nigerian users’ data privacy rights.
The NDPC had, on February 18, 2025, sanctioned the U.S. tech giant for engaging in behavioral advertising on Facebook and Instagram without the explicit consent of Nigerian users, in breach of the Nigeria Data Protection Act (NDPA).
Dissatisfied with the sanctions, Meta filed a motion ex parte on February 26, seeking judicial review of the NDPC’s Final Orders. The court, on March 4, granted Meta permission to commence the suit but declined to stay enforcement of the commission’s orders, instead opting for an accelerated hearing.
In the originating summons filed on March 19 through lead counsel Prof. Gbolahan Elias, SAN, Meta asked the court to determine whether the NDPC’s investigative process and resulting enforcement orders were invalid due to lack of due process. The company argued that it was neither given adequate notice nor afforded the opportunity to respond to the alleged violations before the Final Orders were issued—thereby breaching its constitutional right to a fair hearing under Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution.
However, the NDPC, in a preliminary objection filed April 11 by its counsel Adeola Adedipe, SAN, of ALPHA & ROHI Law Firm, urged the court to strike out or dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction and non-compliance with court rules. Adedipe argued that the originating summons was defective, citing a breach of Order 34 Rule 6(1) of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2019.
According to the NDPC, the reliefs sought in Meta’s originating summons differ significantly from those set out in its earlier ex parte application, making the current suit legally incompetent. The commission said it does not intend to waive its right to object to these fundamental procedural errors.
In a counter-affidavit deposed by NDPC staff member Osunleye Olatubosun, the commission detailed the process that led to the sanctions. He said the investigation stemmed from a petition submitted by the Personal Data Protection Awareness Initiative (PDPAI), which alleged that Meta was engaging in behavioral advertising without user consent.
According to the affidavit, the NDPC found compelling evidence that Meta had processed sensitive personal data—including information on minors’ sex lives, drug use, and school activities—without consent. It also discovered manipulated personal data of Nigerian journalists and public figures being used in gambling ads and inappropriate content distribution, including an explicit childbirth video.
The commission further noted that Meta failed to submit a mandatory 2022 compliance audit and had illegally transferred user data across borders, both of which violated provisions of the NDPA.
As part of its enforcement action, the NDPC directed Meta to:
Obtain express consent from Nigerian users for behavioral advertising;
Conduct a Data Processing Impact Assessment (DPIA) reflecting Nigeria’s democratic interests;
Update its privacy policies;
Cease all unauthorized data transfers outside Nigeria;
Provide educational materials on ethical data processing;
Pay the $32.8 million remedial fee.
Meta also argued that the investigation was invalid because it originated from a third-party petition and not from a complaint by a data subject, as required by Section 65 of the NDPA. It asked the court to nullify the NDPC’s investigation, all proceedings, and the Final Orders. The company also sought an injunction restraining the NDPC from enforcing the orders or intimidating it into paying the fine.
In response to the NDPC’s preliminary objection, Meta filed a motion on April 23 seeking to amend its original statement attached to the ex parte motion, aiming to align its reliefs with those in the originating summons. Counsel Fred Onuofia, SAN, argued that the amendment would promote clarity and ensure a fair hearing, asserting that it would cause no prejudice to the NDPC.
But Adedipe opposed the motion, describing it as presumptuous and legally flawed. He argued that under Order 34 of the court rules, reliefs in a judicial review process cannot be amended—only the grounds for those reliefs may be modified. Adedipe maintained that Meta was attempting to substitute granted reliefs under the guise of amendment, which he said would undermine the integrity of the judicial process.
Justice James Omotosho adjourned the matter to October 3, 2025, for a consolidated ruling on both Meta’s motion to amend and the NDPC’s preliminary objection.
Edited by Dada Ahmed.
