A Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) regulation seeking financial institutions to require and get social media handles of their customers is not a violation of the right to privacy.
This is according to a Federal High Court ruling in Lagos which held that this part of the CBN's Know-Your-Customer procedure was anything but unconstitutional and undemocratic.
Striking out the suit filed by Chris Eke, a Lagos-based lawyer, which sought a declaration that the regulation as contained in the apex bank's 2023 Regulations was not in line with Section 37 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Justice Nnamdi Dimgba maintained that providing social media handles were the same as providing phone numbers and addresses for contact.
He further noted that public visibility from a communication standpoint is the essence of having a social media account.
“This claim is very ambitious and amounts to a very far throw. The said Regulations are directed to and apply to financial institutions. It does not apply to private individuals such as the Applicant.
“Even if, as appears to be argued, that the Regulations itself would inevitably affect the Applicant, this claim is speculative for the simple reason that in nowhere in the affidavit in support was it stated that the Applicant operates an account with a financial institution and that the said institution had demanded his social media handle. So the suggestion that he would be affected by this Regulation, albeit negatively, is very speculative and at large," held Justice Dimbga.
Recall that the CBN had in response to the suit filed by Chris Eke, filed a notice of preliminary objection, challenging it on the grounds of competence.
Furthermore, Justice Dimgba held that: “It is also to my knowledge that even in filling some business applications, personal information of this sort, is sometimes requested, and parties generally oblige. If it does not constitute a breach of privacy, why should it now?
“A social media handle is left at large for the world to see, being in the public space, everyone enjoys the liberty to have access to it whether or not consent was obtained. It would be highly unreasonable to hold the Respondent in breach of privacy for what other persons have access to".
