In a significant development at the Federal High Court in Abuja, the Nigeria Data Protection Commission (NDPC) and Meta Platforms Inc., the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, have signaled their intent to resolve a contentious legal battle over a $32.8 million fine and a series of compliance directives issued by the regulator. The dispute, centered on alleged violations of Nigerian users’ data privacy, has taken a conciliatory turn as both parties informed the court of advanced settlement talks, prompting a judicial pause to facilitate negotiations.
On Friday, October 3, 2025, lawyers representing the NDPC and Meta appeared before Justice James Omotosho to provide updates on the case. The court was initially poised to deliver a ruling on two key matters: the NDPC’s preliminary objection to Meta’s lawsuit challenging the fine and directives, and Meta’s request to amend its court filings to align with its legal claims. However, both sides jointly requested a suspension of the ruling to allow ongoing settlement discussions to progress. Justice Omotosho, emphasizing the court’s preference for amicable resolutions, granted the request and adjourned the case to October 31, 2025, to either adopt agreed settlement terms or proceed with a ruling if negotiations falter.
Meta’s lead counsel, Fred Onwuobia, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), informed the court that the parties had reached an “advanced stage of settlement.” He noted that draft terms of settlement had already been exchanged, underscoring the potential for a mutually agreeable resolution. Onwuobia cautioned that a premature ruling could jeopardize these efforts, urging the court to allow additional time for the parties to finalize their agreement. Echoing this sentiment, NDPC’s counsel, Adeola Adedipe, SAN, confirmed that “settlement discussions have advanced appreciably” and requested an opportunity to present finalized terms for adoption as a consent judgment—a legally binding agreement reflecting the parties’ consensus.
The dispute traces its origins to February 2025, when the NDPC imposed a $32.8 million penalty on Meta following an investigation triggered by a petition from the Personal Data Protection Awareness Initiative. The petition alleged that Meta engaged in behavioral advertising on its platforms, Facebook and Instagram, without obtaining explicit consent from Nigerian users, a practice that contravenes the Nigeria Data Protection Regulation (NDPR). The NDPC’s investigation also uncovered other alleged violations, including Meta’s failure to submit a mandatory 2022 compliance audit, non-compliance with cross-border data transfer requirements, and the unauthorized processing of data belonging to individuals who are not registered users of Meta’s platforms. In addition to the fine, the NDPC issued eight corrective orders aimed at compelling Meta to align its operations with Nigeria’s data protection laws.
Meta swiftly challenged the NDPC’s actions, filing a motion on March 19, 2025, to contest both the substantive findings and the procedural approach of the regulator. Represented by Prof. Gbolahan Elias, SAN, Meta argued that the NDPC’s Final Orders were issued without due process, violating the company’s right to a fair hearing as enshrined in Section 36 of the Nigerian Constitution. According to Meta, the Commission failed to provide adequate notice or an opportunity to respond before imposing the fine and directives. The company sought a judicial review to quash the enforcement orders, asserting that they were legally and procedurally flawed.
In response, the NDPC filed a preliminary objection, arguing that Meta’s lawsuit was incompetent and should be dismissed. Adedipe, representing the NDPC, contended that Meta failed to comply with Order 34 of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, which governs judicial review applications. He further criticized Meta’s originating summons and supporting statements as misaligned, rendering the case defective. Adedipe accused Meta of attempting to covertly replace reliefs previously obtained ex parte—without notice to the opposing party—with new ones under the guise of amending its filings, a move he argued was impermissible under court rules. The NDPC urged the court to strike out Meta’s application entirely, asserting that the Federal High Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the case due to these procedural lapses.
On April 23, 2025, Meta filed a motion seeking leave to amend its initial statement to ensure consistency with the reliefs outlined in its originating summons. The company described the amendment as a necessary step to harmonize its legal documents and strengthen its case. Earlier in the proceedings, Justice Omotosho had granted Meta leave to commence the judicial review but declined to issue a stay on the NDPC’s enforcement orders pending the outcome of the lawsuit. The court scheduled October 3, 2025, for a consolidated ruling on the NDPC’s objection and Meta’s amendment request, but this was deferred in light of the parties’ request to pursue a settlement.
The ongoing negotiations reflect a pragmatic approach by both the NDPC and Meta to avoid protracted litigation, which could have far-reaching implications for data privacy enforcement in Nigeria and Meta’s operations in one of Africa’s largest markets. For the NDPC, the case represents a high-profile test of its authority to regulate global tech giants under the NDPR, which was introduced in 2019 to safeguard Nigerian citizens’ personal data. The regulation mandates that organizations obtain explicit consent for data processing, conduct regular compliance audits, and adhere to strict guidelines for cross-border data transfers. The NDPC’s actions against Meta underscore its commitment to enforcing these standards, particularly in the context of behavioral advertising, which relies on user data to deliver targeted ads.
For Meta, the dispute highlights the challenges of navigating diverse regulatory frameworks across its global operations. Nigeria, with its rapidly growing digital economy and over 100 million internet users, is a key market for the company. A resolution that avoids a costly legal battle while addressing the NDPC’s concerns could allow Meta to maintain its foothold in the region while demonstrating compliance with local laws. The settlement talks also align with broader global trends, as tech companies increasingly face scrutiny over data privacy practices, particularly in jurisdictions with emerging data protection regimes.
The adjournment to October 31, 2025, provides a critical window for the NDPC and Meta to finalize their agreement. Should they succeed, the court will likely adopt the settlement terms as a consent judgment, effectively resolving the dispute without further litigation. If negotiations stall, however, Justice Omotosho is prepared to deliver his ruling on the NDPC’s objection and Meta’s amendment motion, which could set a significant precedent for data protection enforcement in Nigeria.
This case also underscores the evolving landscape of data privacy in Africa, where regulators are increasingly asserting their authority to protect citizens’ data amid the rapid expansion of digital services. For Nigerian users, the outcome of this dispute could influence how their personal information is handled by global tech platforms, potentially setting new standards for transparency and consent in data-driven advertising. As the October 31 deadline approaches, stakeholders will be closely watching whether the NDPC and Meta can reach a resolution that balances regulatory enforcement with the operational realities of a global tech giant.
