Meta, WhatsApp Hit with $220M Fine by Tribunal
The case against Meta Platforms Inc and WhatsApp was set to get more twist as the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission Tribunal upheld a $220 million fine against the two companies with non-discriminatory data practices against Nigerian nationals.
The tribunal upheld the penalty of $220 million imposed by the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) against WhatsApp and Meta Platforms Incorporated, plus $35,000 for reimbursement of costs incurred by the Commission for its investigation against the social media behemoth.
The tribunal dismissed the appeal of WhatsApp and Meta Platforms Incorporated concerning the $220 million penalty imposed by FCCPC for alleged discriminatory practices in Nigeria.
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 verdict was delivered on Friday by a three-member panel of the tribunal led by Thomas Okosun.> WhatsApp and Meta’s legal team led by Professor Gbolahan Elias (SAN), and the felony commission’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.
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 alleged that the demands of the FCCPC were vague, technically impossible to comply with within the stipulated timeframes, and not supported by Nigerian law.
Justified by the findings from an inquiry into violations of data protection and consumer rights alleged against Meta and WhatsApp, the FCCPC imposed a fine.
The Commission was concerned about what it termed Meta’s abusive and invasive activities in relation to data subjects and consumers in Nigeria.
The appellants argued that by the excessive penalty, the FCCPC denied them a fair hearing as there was no opportunity for them to understand how it would be calculated or respond to the calculation of the proposed amount.
They went on to assert that, contrary to FCCPC’s compliance order, identifying and creating a consent mechanism for each data point processed by Nigerian users will be impossible and prohibitively expensive.
The appellants contended that the demands of the FCCPC were vague, technically impossible to comply with within the stipulated timeframe, and not supported by Nigerian law.
The imposition of this fine came after an investigation where the FCCPC found Meta and WhatsApp wanting in practice.
The Commission was concerned about the allegedly abusive and invasive practices of Meta against data subjects and consumers in Nigeria.
The appellants have argued that in this case, because the FCCPC imposed such a heavy penalty, they were denied a fair hearing in that they were not given the opportunity to understand how that penalty would be calculated or respond to the calculation of the amount proposed.
It costs the FCCPC time to access the judgment of the tribunal, which allowed the Commission to hand over its “entire record within its custody” to the panel for the simple purpose of fair transparent adjudication.
Passing judgment, the tribunal has stated that the foreign decisions quoted by the FCCPC are rightly applicable and persuasive in law.
The tribunal partially excluded from the entire record of the FCCPC that sought to tender before it by allowing the record, but it admitted the intrainstitutional memo, email from Udo Udoma Law Firm, and internal memo dated May 7, 2024, like others of its kind.
All final and supplementary orders of the FCCPC were validly done in accordance with the said FCCPC Act and the Evidence Act.
These findings and much more shall, however, challenge WhatsApp and Meta, who, so declared the tribunal, have failed to establish any solid evidence to contest the findings of the FCCPC by affirmative evidence.
As regards the alleged fair hearing by WhatsApp, Okosun said, it’s actually resolved in favor of the FCCPC because the Commission had afforded the same fair hearing to the giants of social media.
He said, “They were given a fair hearing before the Tribunal.”
“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 established that the transfer of data by Meta and WhatsApp to a third party contravenes the data protection laws of Nigeria.
The tribunal therefore finds that WhatsApp and Meta, with regard to the facts of the present case, have valid reasons for their respective argue with the FCCPC.
Thus, the tribunal stated, “The tribunal finds no error in the overall orders of the FCCPC.”
“A regularized manner of imposing administrative penalties of the FCCPC was done against Meta and WhatsApp,” held the tribunal.
Join Our Social Media Channels:
WhatsApp: NaijaEyes
Facebook: NaijaEyes
Twitter: NaijaEyes
Instagram: NaijaEyes
TikTok: NaijaEyes
