Nigeria’s Competition and Consumer Protection Tribunal on Friday ordered WhatsApp and Meta Platforms Incorporated to pay a $220 million pen...
Nigeria’s Competition and Consumer Protection Tribunal on Friday ordered WhatsApp and Meta Platforms Incorporated to pay a $220 million penalty and $35,000 to the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) within 60 days over data discrimination practices in Nigeria.
The tribunal upheld the $220 million penalty imposed by the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) on WhatsApp and Meta Platforms Incorporated, as well as $35,000 as reimbursement for the Commission’s investigation against the social media giant.
The tribunal also dismissed the appeal of WhatsApp and Meta Platforms Incorporated regarding the $220 million penalty imposed by the FCCPC for alleged discriminatory practices in Nigeria.
The tribunal’s three-member panel, led by Thomas Okosun, passed the verdict on Friday.
WhatsApp and Meta’s legal team, led by Professor Gbolahan Elias (SAN), and the FCCPC’s legal team, represented by Babatunde Irukera (SAN), a former Executive Vice Chairman of the Commission, made their final arguments on behalf of their respective clients on January 28, 2025.
Nairametrics previously reported that WhatsApp and Meta Platforms Incorporated had appealed to the tribunal, arguing that the FCCPC’s $220 million penalty should be overturned, citing 22 reasons, including alleged vague directives, unjustifiable data-sharing orders, and procedural errors.
The appellants claimed that the FCCPC’s demands were vague, technically impossible to implement within the stipulated timeframe, and unsupported by Nigerian law.
The fine imposed by the FCCPC followed an investigation into alleged violations of data protection and consumer rights by Meta and WhatsApp.
The Commission expressed concerns about Meta’s allegedly abusive and invasive practices affecting data subjects and consumers in Nigeria.
What WhatsApp and FCCPC Legal Documents Say
In their appeal, the appellants argued that the FCCPC denied them a fair hearing by imposing a hefty penalty without giving them an opportunity to understand how the penalty would be calculated or to respond to the calculation of the proposed amount.
• The appellants contended that, contrary to the FCCPC’s compliance order, identifying and building a consent mechanism for each data point processed by Nigerian users would be impossible and extremely expensive.
• However, the FCCPC maintained in its argument that the $220 million penalty was based on its resolve to remedy the company’s alleged discriminatory practices rather than impose a financial punishment.
• The Commission also highlighted its findings, which revealed that Meta engaged in exploitative practices that violated constitutional guarantees by allowing unauthorized access to and misuse of private information.
Elias had urged the tribunal not to rely on foreign laws that are not applicable in Nigeria, maintaining there is no abuse of dominance since users can choose from other providers such as TikTok and Google Meet.
In response, Irukera urged the tribunal to uphold the Commission’s orders and dismiss the appeal in its entirety. He countered the appellants’ claims about foreign precedents, stating that while foreign law is not binding, it is persuasive in similar contexts.
The FCCPC also sought the tribunal’s leave to transfer the Commission’s “entire record within its custody” to the panel to support a fair and transparent adjudication of the dispute.
What The Tribunal Said
Passing its verdict on Friday, the tribunal stated that the reliance on foreign decisions by the FCCPC is appropriate and persuasive in law.
• The tribunal partially blocked the FCCPC’s entire record, which it sought to tender, while allowing its internal memo, email from Udo Udoma Law Firm, and an internal memo dated May 7, 2024, as supplementary records of appeal.
• The tribunal held that the final and supplementary orders of the FCCPC were validly executed in line with the FCCPC Act and the Evidence Act.
• The tribunal also held that WhatsApp and Meta did not provide any substantial evidence to dispute the FCCPC’s findings.
• Regarding WhatsApp’s allegations of fair hearing, Okosun stated that the issue was resolved in favor of the FCCPC because the Commission had accorded a fair hearing to the social media giants.
“The appellants were given ample opportunity to be heard,” Okosun said.
“The tribunal finds that the FCCPC did not exceed its powers while making orders in respect to data protection,” the tribunal said, adding that the FCCPC acted within its lawful mandate to address market dominance.
• The tribunal found that Meta and WhatsApp were wrong to transfer data of consumers to a third party, which contravened Nigeria’s data protection laws.
•The tribunal agreed with the FCCPC that the privacy policy of WhatsApp and Meta breached Nigerian laws.
“The tribunal finds no error in the overall orders of the FCCPC,” the tribunal held.
“Accordingly, the administrative penalties of the FCCPC were lawfully imposed on Meta and WhatsApp,” the tribunal held.
The tribunal ruled that the appellants’ appeal against the FCCPC failed and was dismissed.
The tribunal subsequently made the following orders:
• Meta parties shall immediately reinstate the right of Nigerian users to determine how their data is shared.
• Meta parties must submit a letter of compliance to this effect by July 1, 2025.
• Meta parties must ensure that they update their application to allow Nigerians to fully express their legitimate right to relate with each data point.
• Meta parties must, within 10 days, provide their proposed policy to the FCCPC and NDPC, and the same must be published.
• Meta shall immediately stop the process of sharing Nigerian users’ information with Facebook and other third parties.
• The tribunal directed Meta to immediately revert to its data-sharing policy of 2016.
• Meta parties must cease the tying of WhatsApp data to Facebook and other third parties without explicitly seeking and obtaining consent from Nigerian users and must provide evidence of compliance.
• Meta must reimburse the FCCPC $35,000 for its investigation.
• Meta must pay the $220 million fine no later than 60 days from Wednesday, April 30, 2025.
What You Should Know
Following the FCCPC’s orders, WhatsApp stated: “In 2021, we globally informed users about how talking to businesses would work. While there was initial confusion, it has proven quite popular.”
Similar fines are not uncommon. The European Data Protection Board had fined Meta a record €1.2 billion for non-compliance with EU privacy regulations.
Over the past five years, Big Tech companies such as Amazon, Meta, and Google have faced significant fines under the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
The legality of the FCCPC’s penalties against Meta Platforms Incorporated is now a matter for the tribunal to decide.
.jpeg)
COMMENTS