Meta: Nigeria’s users face a choice of either no rights or no services
PICTURE: cottonbro studio/Pexels
The social media giant, Meta, announced earlier in May 2025 that it would rather withdraw Facebook and Instagram from Nigeria than comply with essential consumer and data protection rules in the country.
This move, leaving millions of users in Nigeria without one of the main communication services, would be a direct attack on the freedom of expression and access to information for millions.
ARTICLE 19 and undersigned digital rights organisations in Africa call on Meta to comply with the decision of the Competition and Consumer Protection Tribunal of Nigeria, uphold users’ rights and stop using its market power to undermine democratic accountability.
We urge Nigerian authorities and global regulators to stand firm in defending open, fair, and rights-respecting digital spaces.
After a lengthy investigation, in July 2024, Nigeria’s Federal Commission for Competition and Consumer Protection (FCCPC) imposed a $220-million penalty fine on Meta. The Commission among others also ordered that Meta allows Nigerian users the right to control their data as part of the solutions to address the violations
According to the FCCPC, Meta was found responsible for ‘multiple and repeated, as well as continuing infringements’ of the country’s data protection and competition laws.
This included appropriations of personal data without consent, discriminatory practices against Nigerian consumers compared with other jurisdictions, and abuse of dominant position by forcing exploitative privacy policies on consumers without giving them the option to withhold consent or self-determine how their data is used.
Meta appealed the FCCPC decision but the Tribunal upheld the sanctions. In response, Meta threatened to withdraw its services from the country rather than comply with these legal obligations.
Unfortunately, this threat is not new. Meta has a well-documented history of leveraging its dominant market position to resist regulatory oversight and accountability, not only in Nigeria
Commenting on the move, the FCCPC announced that this won’t ‘absolve Meta of liabilities for the outcome of a judicial process’.
We stand strongly behind the FCCPC and urge Meta to obey the High Court decision and to modify the provision of its services in the country to respect the rights of both the people and the businesses using them.
Meta’s size and market dominance do not place it above the law. Indeed, while the fine for a company as large as Meta could be seen merely as a ‘cost of doing business’, the behavioural obligations required by the FCCPC are especially significant.
As ARTICLE 19 highlighted in the 2024 analysis of the FCCPC decision, the case is particularly noteworthy because the FCCPC explicitly recognised the link between protecting fundamental rights, including data protection, and safeguarding competition.
This combination of factors is gradually becoming an issue of global focus, with similar decisions having been reached elsewhere – particularly in the EU – and increasing discussions at the international level.
Meta’s approach is yet another confirmation of the current struggle to ensure Big Tech plays by the rules and to hold them accountable for their abusive and rights-violating behaviours
Facebook and Instagram are extremely popular social media platforms in Nigeria and are used by tens of millions in the country for daily communication and for sharing news. Facebook, in particular, is also a vital tool for many of Nigeria’s small online businesses.
Meta’s significant role in the country, both in the economic and the social sphere, comes with responsibilities.
Across Africa, competition authorities are increasingly investigating dominant US-based Big Tech platforms. These inquiries aim to address structural barriers to competition, market distortions, and the broader economic and social impacts exerted by these companies.
Moreover, co-operation between competition authorities in Kenya, South Africa, Nigeria, Mauritius and Egypt through the Africa Heads of Competition Dialogue (AHCD) aims to harmonise enforcement against anti-competitive practices by dominant digital platforms.
These regional efforts highlight a clear message: Big Tech companies cannot use their market power to exploit consumers, and they cannot rely on their size and influence to place themselves above the law.
Competition authorities have a fundamental task: to keep concentrated power in check and to hold big players accountable. Government’s laws and policies to support decentralised, open and fairer digital markets are also essential
Meta’s threat is a wake-up call for everybody: the current concentration of power in the digital communications infrastructure damages society and the economy. It’s time to take action.
Signed by:
ARTICLE 19
JONCTION
The Press Council of South Africa
Avocats Sans Frontieres France
Kenya Broadcasting Corporation
The Africa Editors Forum
Ochieng Rapuro (independent editor)
South African National Editors’ Forum
DNS World Media and Communications
Rule of Law and Accountability Advocacy Centre
Internet Governance Tanzania Working Group
Human Rights Journalists Network Nigeria/West African Digital Rights Defenders Coalition
The Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa
- This article was first published here
