0
Senior Special Assistant to the President on Digital Communications, Engagement and New Media Strategy, O’tega Ogra, has defended the recent Federal High Court judgment involving Facebook Nigeria and the Advertising Regulatory Council of Nigeria (ARCON), arguing that the ruling strengthens the rule of law and institutional accountability rather than weakening consumer protection.
In a commentary titled “The Facebook Nigeria Judgment Is Not a Defeat for Consumers. It Is a Victory for the Rule of Law,” Ogra maintained that the court’s decision should be viewed as an affirmation of constitutional governance and the limits of regulatory authority.
According to him, while the protection of Nigerian consumers and the accountability of multinational technology companies remain important, regulators must operate strictly within the powers conferred on them by law.
“The issue before the court was never whether consumers should be protected. It was whether the right institution was exercising the right powers in the right way,” he said.
Ogra argued that ARCON’s statutory mandate is limited to regulating advertising practice, advertising content and marketing communications, while consumer protection across sectors falls primarily within the jurisdiction of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC).
He stressed that the powers of any statutory regulator cannot be expanded beyond its enabling law, regardless of the desirability of the intended outcome.
“The powers of a statutory regulator cannot be enlarged by implication or by the desirability of an outcome. They must be found within the four corners of the statute establishing that regulator,” he stated.
He noted that the distinction between regulatory mandates was essential for legal certainty, investor confidence and effective governance, warning that overlapping jurisdictions could create confusion for businesses, encourage litigation and undermine economic growth.
Commenting on the court’s decision to set aside ARCON’s ₦60 billion administrative fine against Facebook Nigeria, Ogra said the judgment merely reaffirmed the long-established legal principle that punitive sanctions are judicial functions, except where legislation expressly provides otherwise.
He further argued that the court did not exempt Meta Platforms or Facebook Nigeria from Nigerian laws but held that ARCON failed to establish the legal basis for holding Facebook Nigeria liable for the actions of its parent company.
“Court decisions are based on admissible evidence, not commercial assumptions or public perception. Judges cannot repair evidentiary deficiencies for litigants,” he said.
According to Ogra, permitting courts to abandon evidentiary standards in the name of public interest would undermine judicial neutrality and create dangerous precedents capable of affecting businesses and individuals alike.
He maintained that consumer protection should not become a basis for institutional overreach, insisting that Nigeria already possesses a robust regulatory framework comprising agencies with clearly defined statutory responsibilities.
He listed institutions such as the Central Bank of Nigeria, Securities and Exchange Commission, Nigerian Communications Commission, Nigeria Data Protection Commission, National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control, Standards Organisation of Nigeria, Corporate Affairs Commission and the Federal Inland Revenue Service as examples of specialised regulators whose effectiveness depends on adherence to clearly delineated mandates.
While acknowledging ARCON’s critical role in promoting ethical advertising and professional standards, Ogra said its statutory importance should not justify expanding its authority beyond what the National Assembly had prescribed.
“If gaps exist in Nigerian law regarding digital platforms, local corporate presence or service of process, the National Assembly should address them. The answer is legislative reform, not regulatory overreach,” he said.
He argued that strong regulation should be measured by the clarity of legal mandates, quality of investigations, respect for due process and the ability of regulatory decisions to withstand judicial scrutiny rather than by the size of penalties imposed.
Ogra also linked the judgment to what he described as President Bola Tinubu’s broader institutional reform agenda, noting that the administration had largely refrained from interfering with the work of regulators or the judiciary.
“Regulators have been allowed to regulate. Courts have been allowed to adjudicate. That reflects confidence in institutions rather than executive discretion,” he said.
He added that institutional independence also requires competence, proportionality and fidelity to enabling statutes.
According to him, the judgment presents an opportunity to strengthen Nigeria’s regulatory framework by clarifying institutional mandates, improving cooperation among agencies and reinforcing investor confidence.
Ogra called on the Association of Advertisers in Nigeria (ADVAN) to facilitate constructive engagement among advertisers, agencies, media organisations, digital platforms, regulators and policymakers to reduce unnecessary litigation within the advertising industry.
He argued that Nigeria’s advertising ecosystem would benefit more from collaboration than prolonged legal disputes, stressing that regulatory certainty has become a critical factor in attracting domestic and foreign investment.
“This is not a call for weaker regulation. It is a call for smarter regulation founded on legal certainty, institutional respect and constructive engagement,” he said.
He concluded that Nigeria’s future would depend not on more powerful regulators but on stronger institutions that respect the limits of their authority, uphold the rule of law and earn public confidence through competence, fairness and accountability.
