Meta faced multimillion-dollar penalties from Nigerian regulators while simultaneously building new relationships with government institutions. An investigation by The Continent identified at least 17 engagements between Big Tech companies and Nigerian government institutions since 2024, many of which have provided little public information about the terms of the agreements or discussions.
In February 2025, representatives of three of the world’s most powerful technology companies—Meta, Microsoft and Google—met with the Nigeria Data Protection Commission (NDPC) to discuss possible areas of collaboration.
Vincent Olatunji, head of the NDPC, welcomed the engagement and expressed his delight “at the prospect of collaborating with global tech giants.” He also highlighted the importance of synergy among the public sector, private sector, civil society organisations and academia.
At the time, Meta was engaged in a regulatory dispute with Nigerian authorities over its handling of the personal information of millions of Nigerians. In July 2024, the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) fined Meta and WhatsApp $220 million following a 38-month investigation.
The FCCPC found, among other issues, that Nigerians had insufficient control over how their personal information was collected, shared and used.
Meta appealed the decision but lost. The company subsequently threatened to suspend its services in Nigeria. Although the 60-day deadline for payment expired in June 2025, Meta continues to operate normally while the legal dispute remains unresolved.
Within days of the NDPC’s collaboration discussions with Meta, Microsoft and Google being publicly reported, the data protection regulator imposed a separate $32.8 million penalty on Meta.
However, in the months that followed, the $32.8 million case was settled. According to a Premium Times investigation, the settlement set aside the Nigeria Data Protection Commission’s fine and eight corrective orders against Meta, releasing the company from liabilities arising from the case. The publication reported that several specific regulatory requirements were replaced with broader commitments by Meta to comply with Nigeria’s data-protection law and strengthen its data-protection measures.
The same commission later announced that, “in collaboration with Meta Inc.,” it had translated the Nigeria Data Protection Act into local languages. In May 2026, another arm of the Nigerian government launched GovGuide Nigeria, an AI-powered service built with Meta’s technology to help Nigerians navigate public services.
The Continent asked Meta and Nigerian government agencies when discussions around GovGuide began. In Nigeria, companies are not required to record meetings with government institutions in public registers. There is no routine public record showing which companies approach government officials, what they seek from them, or what is discussed behind closed doors.
As a result, The Continent began building its own record.
Its investigation identified at least 17 publicly documented engagements between major technology companies and the Nigerian state since 2024. These include meetings with the president and regulators, government AI projects, training programmes, funding arrangements and policy discussions.
Many of these engagements are ordinary interactions between the government and companies operating in one of Africa’s largest digital markets. However, some bring technology companies into closer contact with the institutions responsible for regulating their operations in Nigeria.
The Meta case highlights the responsibilities of these regulators.
At the centre of concerns raised by various Nigerian regulators was the question of whether Nigerians using WhatsApp had sufficient choice over what happened to their personal data. Information collected about individuals can be used to build profiles of their interests and behaviour and, among other things, determine the advertising they are shown.
The Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission also found that Meta shared and transferred Nigerians’ personal information without proper permission and provided Nigerian users with fewer data protections than users in some other countries.
GovGuide raises a related set of concerns.
The AI-powered platform allows Nigerians to find and understand government information through text, voice and WhatsApp in English, Yoruba, Hausa and Igbo. According to its privacy notice, the platform may collect names, contact details, addresses, government-issued identifiers, geolocation, device and IP information, as well as users’ chatbot prompts, documents, images, audio and conversation logs.
The information may be used to personalise services, conduct analytics and research, and improve the chatbot and machine-learning models.
Privacy lawyer Olumide Babalola, who served as counsel in Odunola Kehinde v. Vesti, a case involving alleged unauthorised data disclosures under the Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023, pointed to what he described as an unusual situation.
He noted that the high-profile data protection case against Meta was fundamentally concerned with how the company handled Nigerians’ data.
“The Nigerian data protection framework generally forbids the processing of personal data except where there exists a lawful basis,” Babalola explained. “In the absence of any document establishing otherwise, Meta does not have any lawful basis to use citizens’ data in an undisclosed manner.”
He said the context surrounding GovGuide was different because citizens interact with what they understand to be a government service rather than a public social media platform.
“The presumption should be that any data processing is strictly for the purpose of providing that government service, unless explicit, informed consent is obtained for any other use,” he said.
The commission was also asked whether its proposed collaboration with Meta, discussed during the February 2025 meeting, continued while the privacy case against the company remained active and through its eventual settlement.
Neither the agencies involved nor Meta answered questions about GovGuide or the nature and timing of their broader collaboration. Available evidence shows that regulatory action and discussions about collaboration took place during the same period, but it does not establish that the two were connected.
However, the Meta case is not an isolated partnership.
A review of public records identified at least 17 engagements between Big Tech companies and the Nigerian state over the past three years. These range from funding and training programmes to meetings with senior government officials, technology projects and dealings with regulators.
The full extent of engagements between the government, regulators and Big Tech companies remains difficult to establish. Nigeria has no register showing who meets government officials, what is discussed or what companies may be seeking to influence. Many of the agreements behind these partnerships are also not publicly available, leaving only a partial picture of how deeply Big Tech has become embedded in Nigeria’s digital ambitions.
Ali Sabo, head of digital rights at the Centre for Information Technology and Development (CITAD), described this influence as “soft influence.”
“While their projects can aid national development, they also quietly shape how policymakers view technology and governance,” Sabo said.
He warned that, if left unchecked, reliance on external technology platforms could threaten government independence, create over-reliance on specific vendors and restrict future policy choices.
“Partnerships need to be out in the open, protected by clear safeguards, and open to input from universities, civil society organisations, and local tech builders,” he said.
In October 2024, the Nigerian government partnered with Data Science Nigeria to announce a N2.8 billion Google.org grant for national AI talent programmes linked to the Federal Ministry of Communications, Innovation, and Digital Economy.
The programmes included the DeepTech Ready Track for 20,000 advanced learners, the Experience AI teacher programme, which was designed to reach 25,000 teachers and 125,000 students, and a Government AI Campus for civil servants.
These programmes introduce thousands of Nigerians to specific company tools, certification tracks and software ecosystems from a young age. According to analysts, the companies are effectively securing lifelong customers for their ecosystems.
When The Continent asked Google’s communications and PR manager for West Africa, Taiwo Kola-Ogunlade, about data protection during these initiatives, he said the company’s products use “industry-leading technology” to protect users’ information. He also pointed to privacy controls, Google’s registration with the NDPC and the appointment of a data protection officer.
However, his response did not specify where data generated through the public-sector programmes is stored, how long it is retained or whether it can be used to improve commercial AI products.
In 2025, Microsoft partnered with the Federal Ministry of Communications, Innovation, and Digital Economy (FMCIDE), Data Science Nigeria and Lagos Business School to launch the AI National Skills Initiative (AINSI), which aimed to train 35,000 people in artificial intelligence.
Participants received certificates linked to the national 3 Million Technical Talent (3MTT) portal. Another partnership with Junior Achievement Nigeria (JA Nigeria) introduced thousands of young students to the basics of generative AI.
Grace, a student at the Federal University of Technology Akure, participated in the Microsoft/JA Nigeria Career Essentials AI programme and received free access to Microsoft Copilot and LinkedIn Premium. She and other participants later extended the programme to students on another campus.
Her experience also demonstrates how the company’s programmes introduce young people to a wider technology ecosystem beyond AI.
When asked about data privacy and access, Microsoft provided figures covering registrations, learning activity and certification. However, it did not provide the commercial agreements, contract values, procurement information or licensing arrangements requested.
Regarding the role of its own products in the training, Microsoft said, “Specific training pathways may include Microsoft technologies, where relevant to the curriculum.”
Tech analyst Eze Hanson described these programmes as a combination of smart philanthropy and workforce development, while warning of potential risks.
“Embedding a proprietary suite of developer networks, certification paths, and job-search platforms into a state-backed mass training can be perceived as seeding a captive user base and standardising national dependency on a technology infrastructure,” Hanson explained.
The concern exists alongside Nigeria’s ambitions to achieve greater digital independence.
Nigeria is seeking greater control over its data and digital infrastructure, but it is doing so while becoming increasingly reliant on global technology companies that provide much of the funding, training and technology behind that transformation.
Many of the agreements defining these relationships remain outside public view.
“When government partners with multinational companies to handle public services and data, the public deserves to know the terms of the deal,” said civil society transparency advocate Adekunle Omolabi.
For now, the announcements are public. Much of what has been agreed behind them remains undisclosed.
About The Author
