A Federal High Court in Lagos has set aside the N60 billion sanction imposed by the Advertising Regulatory Council of Nigeria (ARCON) on Facebook Nigeria Operations Limited over alleged unapproved advertisements targeted at the Nigerian market.
Justice Yellim Bogoro held that ARCON acted outside its statutory powers and breached the company’s constitutional right to a fair hearing.
In a judgment delivered on 18 June 2026 in Suit No. FHC/L/CS/2205/2024, Justice Bogoro declared ARCON’s Notice of Violation/Demand for Compliance, dated 21 October 2024, unconstitutional, unlawful, null and void. The court also restrained the regulator from taking any further steps to enforce the notice.
The judgment, obtained by The Guardian on Tuesday, further held that ARCON lacks the statutory authority to impose fines for alleged criminal violations under the Advertising Regulatory Council of Nigeria Act, 2022, without a prior conviction by a court or other competent tribunal.
The dispute arose after ARCON accused Facebook Nigeria Operations Limited of exposing advertisements on Facebook and Instagram to the Nigerian market without obtaining prior approval from the Advertising Standards Panel, contrary to the provisions of the ARCON Act and the Nigerian Code of Advertising.
In its notice, the regulator directed the company to cease exposing unapproved advertisements to Nigerian audiences and demanded payment of N60 billion, describing the alleged breaches as repeated violations.
Facebook Nigeria, through its counsel, Mofesomo Tayo-Oyetibo (SAN), challenged the notice, arguing that ARCON had no legal authority to determine criminal liability or impose punitive sanctions through an administrative process without first affording the company a fair hearing.
The company also maintained that it neither owns nor operates Facebook or Instagram, contending that both platforms are owned and controlled by Meta Platforms Inc., a separate foreign corporate entity.
ARCON, represented by Akinlolu Kehinde (SAN), opposed the suit, arguing that Facebook Nigeria represents Meta’s operations in Nigeria and should therefore bear responsibility for alleged regulatory breaches relating to advertisements displayed on the platforms.
The regulator further submitted that its notice was a regulatory compliance measure, giving the company the option of complying with its directives, paying the prescribed violation fee or facing prosecution.
However, Justice Bogoro rejected ARCON’s arguments.
The court held that Facebook Nigeria is a distinct legal entity from Meta Platforms Inc. and found that ARCON failed to produce sufficient evidence establishing that the Nigerian company owns, operates or controls Facebook or Instagram.
According to the judge, the regulator’s assertion that Facebook Nigeria represents Meta’s interests in Nigeria was insufficient to impose liability for the alleged advertising violations.
On the issue of fair hearing, the court held that ARCON breached Section 36 of the Constitution by making allegations against the company and simultaneously imposing a substantial financial sanction without first giving it an opportunity to respond.
Justice Bogoro further held that Section 57(4) of the ARCON Act expressly requires the regulator to accord any alleged violator a fair hearing before imposing any penalty.
The court also found that the alleged breaches relied upon by ARCON were criminal in nature, noting that Section 34 of the ARCON Act provides that exposing advertisements in contravention of the Act constitutes an offence.
The judge ruled that because the Act stipulates that punishment may only follow upon conviction, ARCON lacked the authority to impose the N60 billion penalty through an administrative process.
He held that, irrespective of the description given to it by the regulator, the N60 billion demand amounted, in substance, to a fine that could only be imposed by a court of competent jurisdiction following due judicial proceedings.
Consequently, the court declared the Notice of Violation/Demand for Compliance unconstitutional, unlawful and issued ultra vires ARCON’s statutory powers.
Justice Bogoro also declared that ARCON has no authority to impose fines for alleged violations of Sections 34(3) and 54, or any other criminal provisions of the ARCON Act.
The court accordingly set aside the notice and granted a perpetual injunction restraining ARCON, its officers, agents and privies from taking any further steps to enforce the notice dated 21 October 2024 against Facebook Nigeria Operations Limited.
