A Lagos State High Court sitting at Tafawa Balewa Square has ordered Meta Platforms Inc. to pay $25,000 in damages to renowned human rights lawyer, Mr Femi Falana (SAN), over the publication of a false video on Facebook alleging that he was suffering from a terminal illness.
The offending video, which surfaced on Facebook in early 2025, falsely claimed that Falana was critically ill, prompting him to institute a privacy and data protection suit against the social media giant.
Delivering judgment on Tuesday, Justice Olalekan Oresanya held that Meta violated Section 24 of the Nigeria Data Protection Act (NDPA) by processing Falana’s personal data in a manner that was inaccurate, harmful, unfair, and without lawful justification.
The judge ruled that the dissemination of false medical information amounted to the unlawful processing of sensitive personal data, stressing that health-related data enjoys enhanced legal protection under Nigerian law.
Falana filed the suit through his lawyer, Mr Olumide Babalola, following the widespread circulation of the misleading video on Facebook.
In his judgment, Justice Oresanya made far-reaching pronouncements on the responsibility of digital platforms, stating that global technology companies like Meta owe a duty of care to individuals affected by content published on platforms operated for commercial gain.
The court rejected Meta’s argument that it merely functions as a hosting platform or intermediary. Justice Oresanya held that where a platform monetises content and the harm arising from misinformation is reasonably foreseeable, it cannot evade liability. He noted that this approach is consistent with emerging global jurisprudence on platform accountability.
The judge further ruled that Falana’s status as a public figure does not strip him of his right to privacy, adding that the publication of false medical information constitutes a serious intrusion into private life, regardless of public status.
The court also found that Meta determines the means and purposes of data processing on its platform, monetises content, and controls distribution through algorithms. On this basis, it held that Meta acts as a joint data controller with page owners and is vicariously liable for unlawful content disseminated on Facebook.
Justice Oresanya faulted Meta for failing to put in place adequate safeguards to prevent or reduce the harm caused by misinformation. According to the court, a company with Meta’s technological capacity and financial resources is expected to maintain effective content moderation systems, prompt takedown mechanisms, and safeguards proportionate to the risks posed by false information.
The failure to do so, the judge concluded, amounted to non-compliance with Meta’s obligations under the NDPA.
Meta was represented in court by Mr Tayo Oyetibo (SAN).
