Meta Appeals Nigerian Ruling on Ad Tracking Consent
Meta has filed an appeal against a Lagos High Court ruling that restricts how it processes Nigerians' Facebook and Instagram data for behavioural advertising. The September 25 judgment ordered Meta to stop non-consensual profiling, pay $100,000 in damages, and comply with the Nigeria Data Protection Act. The appeal now moves the fight over consent, targeted ads, and cross-border data transfers to the Court of Appeal, with major implications for how global platforms operate in Nigeria.
What the High Court Ruled
Justice A.F. Pokanu of the Lagos High Court, Ikorodu Judicial Division, ruled that Meta's non-consensual collection, profiling, and use of users' data for behavioural advertising violated Nigeria's Constitution and the Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023. The court ordered Meta to stop the unlawful processing, take remedial steps to comply with the NDPA, and submit an affidavit of compliance within eight weeks. It awarded the applicants $100,000 in general damages, ₦1 million in costs, and post-judgment interest. The judge rejected Meta's argument that building profiles for targeted advertising is necessary to provide a social-networking service simply because advertising funds it, calling behavioural advertising ancillary rather than essential. The court also held that Meta bore the burden of proving valid consent and that consent to profiling could not be folded into broad standard terms.
Cross-Border Data Transfers Under Scrutiny
The court also examined Meta's handling of Nigerian users' data outside the country. Meta argued it has no data centre in Nigeria and that users effectively transfer their own information abroad when they access its services. Justice Pokanu rejected that reasoning, holding that users do not control where their data is routed, stored, or processed. As a major data controller, Meta remained responsible for complying with the NDPA's safeguards for international data transfers, the court found. It ruled that unauthorised cross-border transfers of the applicants' data violated Sections 41 to 43 of the NDPA and infringed their privacy rights. This finding could set a precedent for how global platforms handle data from Nigerian users.
Why the Appeal Matters for Users and Platforms
The appeal brings the consent dispute, targeted advertising, and cross-border data transfers before the Court of Appeal. At stake is whether global platforms can make behavioural tracking a condition of accessing free social-media services, or whether Nigerian law requires a clearer separation between access and consent to data use for advertising. For users, the outcome could determine how much control Nigerians have over the personal data they generate on Facebook and Instagram. If the judgment is upheld, users could have stronger grounds to expect meaningful consent before their activity is used for behavioural advertising, while Meta could be required to change how it processes and transfers their data. If the appeal succeeds, Meta would have more room to rely on its existing terms and advertising model. The case is separate from Meta's earlier disputes with Nigerian regulators, including a $220 million penalty by the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission in 2024 and a $32.8 million remedial fee by the Nigeria Data Protection Commission, which was later resolved through a consent judgment.
Key Takeaways
- Meta is appealing a Lagos High Court ruling that stopped it from using Nigerians' data for targeted ads without explicit consent.
- The court found behavioural advertising is not essential to providing Facebook and Instagram, rejecting Meta's terms-based consent model.
- The ruling also held Meta responsible for cross-border data transfers under the NDPA, even without a local data centre.
- The appeal will test whether platforms can make behavioural tracking a condition of free access in Nigeria.
- The outcome could reshape how global platforms handle consent and data transfers across Africa.
Keep Reading
