Foundation for Digital Justice Sues TikTok Over Alleged Restrictions in Four Northern States

The Foundation for Digital Justice has filed a lawsuit against TikTok Inc. at the Federal High Court in Abuja over alleged restrictions preventing millions of users in Kaduna, Kano, Kebbi and Sokoto states from accessing the social media platform.

The organisation is asking the court to order TikTok to restore access to affected users, alleging that the restrictions violate Nigerians’ constitutional rights to freedom of expression and freedom from discrimination.

The suit was filed on October 5, 2026, by the foundation’s lead counsel, Festus Ogun, under the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, 2009. Details of the case were reported by Punch Online.

In an affidavit supporting the application, Abidat Idowu, a legal officer with the foundation, alleged that users in the four states began experiencing difficulties accessing TikTok around September 11, 2026.

According to the affidavit, access had become severely restricted by September 14, leaving millions of users unable to use the platform normally.

The reported problems included videos failing to load, feeds freezing during scrolling and content uploads repeatedly stalling, particularly when users accessed the platform through standard mobile data connections.

“These users cannot load videos, refresh their feeds and upload content on TikTok,” Idowu stated in the affidavit.

The foundation alleged that the disruption had affected residents’ ability to receive and share information, express opinions and participate in online discussions.

Foundation Alleges Discrimination Against Users

The organisation further claimed that users in other parts of Nigeria continued to access TikTok without similar difficulties, raising concerns about the alleged difference in treatment.

According to the affidavit, some affected users reportedly regained access by connecting through virtual private networks (VPNs), which can route internet traffic through servers in other locations.

The foundation argued that TikTok had not provided an explanation for the alleged restrictions or why users in Kaduna, Kano, Kebbi and Sokoto appeared to be affected differently from users elsewhere in the country.

It is asking the court to determine whether the alleged restrictions violate Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution, which guarantees freedom of expression, and Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, which protects the right to receive information and express and disseminate opinions within the law.

The suit also raises questions about Section 42 of the Constitution and Article 2 of the African Charter, which provide protections against discrimination.

The foundation maintained that TikTok serves purposes beyond entertainment, including journalism, business promotion, communication, civic engagement and political and social discussions.

It argued that the alleged disruption had prevented affected users from posting content, viewing videos, replying to posts, reposting material and liking publications.

The organisation considers these activities forms of expressive conduct and argues that restricting access to them limits users’ ability to participate in public discussions.

The Foundation for Digital Justice is seeking several orders from the Federal High Court.

Among other requests, it wants the court to declare the alleged restrictions wrongful, arbitrary and unconstitutional, and to rule that the reported difference in access between the four states and other parts of Nigeria amounts to discrimination.

It is also seeking an order directing TikTok to remove the alleged restrictions immediately and a perpetual injunction preventing the company from imposing similar restrictions on users in the affected states or elsewhere in Nigeria without lawful justification.

In addition, the organisation wants the court to order TikTok to publish a public apology in three newspapers with nationwide circulation within seven days of judgment.

The foundation said the legal action was necessary to protect digital rights, uphold constitutional guarantees and preserve the rule of law.

It warned that, unless the court grants the reliefs sought, the alleged restrictions could continue to affect millions of users in the four states.

The allegations contained in the court filing have yet to be established by a judicial determination. The filing of the suit does not, by itself, establish that TikTok deliberately restricted access or violated users’ rights.