The National Assembly has opposed the suit filed by Olumide Babalola, Esq., challenging the alleged failure of the Federal Government to adequately fund the Nigeria Data Protection Commission (NDPC).
The case, currently before the Federal High Court in Lafia, revolves around the non-provision of a take-off grant to the NDPC, which Mr. Babalola argues is impeding the enforcement of privacy rights under the Nigeria Data Protection Act, 2023.
The Suit names several respondents, including the Minister of Communications, the Attorney General of the Federation, the Nigerian Communications Commission, the National Information Technology Development Agency, and the Nigeria Data Protection Commission itself. Babalola contends that the failure to release the necessary funds for the NDPC undermines its ability to fulfill its mandate, particularly the protection of citizens’ privacy rights.
However, in a counter affidavit filed by the National Assembly, represented by Senior Legislative Officer Abdulhameed Usman Ali, the legislative body argues that it has fulfilled its statutory obligation to appropriate the necessary funds. The Assembly further asserts that it is not responsible for establishing or releasing the funds, a duty it claims lies with other respondents.
Key Points of Contention
The National Assembly’s response centers on three key arguments:
- Lack of Reasonable Cause of Action: The National Assembly contends that the Applicant has failed to disclose any direct wrongdoing by the legislative body that would justify his claims. The affidavit notes that there is no factual situation in which the Assembly’s actions have resulted in a breach of privacy rights.
- Absence of Pre-Action Notice: The National Assembly also maintains that Babalola did not serve the required three-month pre-action notice, a condition mandated by the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act, 2017, before filing the lawsuit. The failure to meet this condition, the Assembly argues, renders the suit premature and divests the court of jurisdiction.
- Applicant’s Lack of Locus Standi: In what could be the most critical aspect of the defense, the National Assembly claims that Babalola lacks the legal standing to institute the suit. The legislative body argues that Babalola has not demonstrated that he represents the people of Nigeria or has the authority to file such a case on their behalf. The Assembly’s legal team asserts that standing is a threshold issue, and without it, the court lacks jurisdiction to hear the case.
Request for Dismissal
Citing these reasons, the National Assembly has urged the Federal High Court to dismiss the lawsuit, describing it as “mischievous, frivolous, and ill-intended.” The Assembly also calls for the court to award costs in its favor, arguing that the case is an unnecessary distraction from its constitutional duties.
The case is being closely watched by legal experts and data protection advocates, given the significant implications it could have for the enforcement of Nigeria’s newly enacted Data Protection Act. A ruling in favor of the plaintiff could compel the federal government to provide the necessary funds for the NDPC to fully operate, while a dismissal could stall the Commission’s progress in safeguarding Nigerians’ privacy rights.
As the Federal High Court prepares to deliberate on the issues of jurisdiction and locus standi, many are eager to see how the judiciary will interpret the legislative and financial obligations concerning the NDPC. For now, the debate over data privacy and government accountability continues to intensify in Nigeria.