- Subscribers can seek rights and win against mobile service providers
Global System for Mobile (GSM) communication service providers have to learn a lesson from the judgment of the Court of Appeal against one of their own, MTN, over unsolicited messages they often send to their subscribers. The court upheld part of the May 15, 2013 judgment of Justice Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court, Abuja, in respect of a suit filed by a lawyer and MTN subscriber against the telecoms giant. Godfrey Eneye had filed the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/431/2012 before Justice Ademola, contending that MTN had violated his rights by revealing or permitting his private line registered with the network provider to be accessed by other organisations and persons ‘who sent unsolicited, irritating and annoying messages to the said line’.
He had stated in his suit that, “The respondent (MTN) offers and provides a bulk SMS message service to customers and permits the sending of bulk messages by individuals, organisations and other bodies through their network upon certain specified conditions agreed between the respondent and the respective subscribers to the said bulk SMS service.”
Justice Ademola found merit in Eneye’s case and awarded the case in his favour. Dissatisfied, MTN appealed the judgment and its appeal was thrown out by the three-man panel that heard it at the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal. The three-man bench, led by Justice Tinuade Akomolafe-Wilson unanimously agreed that the telecoms firm violated its subscriber’s right to privacy as guaranteed under Section 37 of the 1999 Constitution.
Justice Emmanuel Agim, who prepared the lead judgment said: “By giving those unknown persons and organisations access to the respondent’s MTN GSM phone number, to send text messages into it, the appellant violated the respondent’s fundamental right to privacy guaranteed by section 37 of the Constitution which includes the right to the privacy of a person’s telephone line.
“The said section 37 of the 1999 Constitution provides that, ‘The privacy of citizens, their homes, correspondence, telephone conversations and telegraphic conversations is hereby guaranteed and protected’.
“The innumerable text messages without his consent at all times is a violation of his fundamental right to the privacy of his telephone conversations, correspondence and his person and telephone line and telephone message inbox.”
According to the judge, the infringement also violated Rule 14(1)(b), (2) and (3) of the General Consumer Code of Practice Rules and the Consumer Code of Practice Regulations 2007, both of which were regulations made on the strength of section 70 of the Communications Act.
Although the N3million that the appellate court asked MTN to pay to the subscriber, with 10 percent interest from the day of the judgment is peanut considering the enormous financial resources of the telecoms provider, it is important in its symbolism. Unsolicited messages are only one of the many infractions of the GSM service providers against their subscribers. However, many Nigerians merely bemoan their fate in the face of these infractions; they hardly explore the court option apparently because of the time and resources it would take to conclude the matter.
We commend Eneye for seeing the matter to its logical conclusion. With the judgment, it should be clear to the telecoms providers that there are some subscribers who are ready to seek the enforcement of their rights at the law courts; thus keeping the firms on their toes.
We must state though, that it is largely the failure of regulation that makes these firms to take subscribers for granted. No doubt GSM has revolutionised the way we do things in the country as in other places, and Nigerians are happy for this. But when will call drops and network failures in the middle of conversation stop? To now worsen matters, the service providers inundate subscribers with unsolicited messages and calls that they never bargained for
