Lawyers Drag MTN, Pantami, Others To Court In Kano, Demand N600m Damages

One of the leading telecommunication companies, MTN Nigeria Communication Plc has been dragged before a Federal High Court in Kano for poor quality service delivery, invasion of privacy and nonchalant attitude towards genuine complaint of the plaintiffs’ request and therefore demand over 600 million naira as damages.

The Nigerian Communication Commission (NCC) and Minister of Communication and Digital Economy, Prof. Isa Ali Pantami were also joined in the suit as defendants for breach of statutory duty to protect the interest of the plaintiffs and ensure compliance with Nigeria Communications Act, 2005.

The case was filed by the plaintiffs’ counsel, Barrister Abdulkarim Kabiru Maude and the defendants were served with about 150 pages process on 12th May, 2022 and were given 30 days to respond or face the wrath of the court.

According to the plaintiffs, Barrister Ishaq Abubakar Baba and Barrister Shamsi Ubale Jibril who are staff of Kano State Polytechnic, on 24th November, 2021 between the hours of 8:00 pm and 12 midnight, and also on 13th December, 2021 around 7:40 pm and 8:45 pm, the MTN Nigeria PLC deprived them business opportunity with their clients all because of their poor network service delivery which caused them serious economic loss and mental injury.

In addition, the plaintiffs also complained of receiving disgusting unsolicited SMS from third parties which was allowed by the MTN which constitutes violation of their privacy of telephone conversation and telegraphic communication guaranteed to them by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).

The counsel of the plaintiffs seeks “An order of this honourable court awarding the sum of N 50,000,000 (fifty million naira only) against the 1st defendant (MTN) in favour of the plaintiffs for invasion of their right to privacy . . . .”

“An order of this honourable court awarding the sum of N 500,000,000 (five hundred million naira only) to the plaintiffs as exemplary damages against the 1st defendant (MTN) for aggravating their damage through its act of continued . . . “, part of the process reads.