A Lagos State High Court sitting in Ikorodu has ordered X Corp, the owner and operator of the X platform (formerly Twitter), to disclose the identity of the anonymous operator of a parody account found liable for violating the data privacy rights of a Nigerian student.
In a judgment delivered in June 2026, which was recently made public, Justice Adeniyi Pokanu awarded ₦20 million in general damages against the unidentified operator of the account @boutmoney112 for the unauthorized alteration and republication of the applicant’s social media post.
The court also awarded conditional general damages of ₦50 million against X Corp. The amount will become payable if the company fails, omits, or refuses to comply with the court’s order to disclose information capable of identifying the anonymous account holder.
Justice Pokanu directed X Corp to file an Affidavit of Disclosure within 14 days of being served the enrolled judgment. The affidavit must provide the account holder’s full name, contact details including email addresses and telephone numbers, registered social media accounts, means of identification, and any other information in X Corp’s possession that could identify or locate the user for the enforcement of the court’s orders.
The suit was filed by Esther Agboola, a student who operates the X handle @agirlnamed_esth. Her originating motion was dated January 25, 2026.
According to court documents, Agboola had posted photographs on January 9, 2026, with the caption, “Chapter 25. Happy Birthday to me!” to celebrate her 25th birthday.
She told the court that the operator of @boutmoney112 retrieved an earlier birthday post she made in January 2025 celebrating her 24th birthday, altered its timestamp to make it appear as though it had been published in January 2022, and republished it.
The court found that the manipulated post created a false impression that Agboola had lied about her age, exposing her to cyberbullying, harassment, public ridicule, emotional distress, and reputational damage.
Seeking legal redress, Agboola asked the court to declare that her rights had been violated, award damages, and compel X Corp to disclose information that would identify the anonymous account operator.
In his judgment, Justice Pokanu held that the unauthorized manipulation, alteration, and republication of Agboola’s post violated her constitutional right to privacy as guaranteed under Section 37 of the 1999 Constitution.
The court further ruled that the conduct amounted to unlawful and unfair processing of personal data in violation of Sections 24(1)(a) and 24(1)(e) of the Nigeria Data Protection Act, 2023, which require personal data to be processed lawfully, fairly, transparently, and accurately.
Justice Pokanu noted that constitutional privacy protections extend beyond physical spaces to include personal information and digital data. In reaching the decision, the court relied on previous judicial authorities, including Emerging Markets Telecommunication Services Ltd v. Barr Godfrey Eneye and Incorporated Trustees of Digital Rights Lawyers Initiative & Ors v. NIMC.
The judge also considered a Dutch court decision compelling a social media platform to disclose the identity of an anonymous user, describing it as persuasive authority.
The court held that X Corp, as the platform owner, possesses user information and activity logs capable of identifying anonymous account operators and should therefore assist in enforcing the court’s orders.
Justice Pokanu awarded Agboola ₦20 million against the anonymous user for the mental anguish, emotional distress, harassment, humiliation, and reputational injury she suffered.
The court further ruled that the ₦50 million damages against X Corp would only take effect if the company fails to comply with the disclosure order.
The judgment provides Agboola with both financial compensation and a court-backed mechanism to uncover the identity of the anonymous individual behind the parody account.
Agboola was represented by Dr. Olumide Babalola and two other lawyers. According to the judgment, neither X Corp nor the anonymous account operator was represented by legal counsel during the proceedings.
About The Author
