By Victor Sunday
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/idrinstitute.png")
- Introduction
The arrival of the Ray-Ban Meta glasses in Nigeria has not gone unnoticed. What was marketed as a marriage of style and innovation has, upon deeper introspection, been received with suspicion and unease. Undoubtedly, this invention remains advantageous in some sense. At least, its features capture hands-free recording at the blink of an eye, instant live-streaming, voice-activated assistance, and the ability to capture memories without fumbling for a phone useful to students, journalists, security agents, travelers, etc.
However, for many Nigerians who live in a society already grappling with insecurity, data theft, and fragile privacy norms, the invention feels less like progress and more like an intrusion. Across campuses, workplaces, and even churches, speculations have risen: what happens if a stranger walks into a meeting wearing these glasses? Can every conversation be secretly captured? Will students, traders, and worshippers suddenly find their images floating across social media without consent? These are not idle fears. They are grounded in the lived reality of a nation where fraudsters prey on digital vulnerabilities and where privacy laws are still finding their teeth.
However, the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), in section 37, proclaims the sanctity of privacy, protecting “the privacy of citizens, their homes, correspondence, telephone conversations and telegraphic communications.” The Court has also lent its weight as seen in the case of Emerging Market Telecommunication Services v Barr Godfrey Nya Eneye (2018) LPELR-46193 where the Court affirmed that privacy is no idle aspiration but a substantive shield protecting the individual from intrusion.
At the time the Constitution was drafted, probably, the greatest fear was the tapping of telephone lines or the interception of letters. The framers did not imagine a world where a pair of glasses could silently record the intimate moments of our daily existence. Yet here we are, facing the stark reality.
Are privacy issues the only concern in this unfolding development? Certainly not!
2.0. Brewing Legal Issues
2.1. On Defamation
A central danger lies in defamation. With the touch of a command, a user could record a conversation, edit it out of context, and circulate it on social media. The damage to reputation in such a case would be swift and devastating. The Supreme Court in Guardian Newspapers Ltd. v. Ajeh (2011) 10 NWLR (Pt. 1256) 574 restated the elements of actionable defamation: the words must be defamatory, must refer to the claimant, and must be published to a third party. A recording disseminated via WhatsApp or Twitter easily satisfies these conditions.
But technology complicates litigation. Under Section 84 of the Evidence Act 2011, electronic evidence is admissible only where authenticity is proven. How then do courts weigh manipulated video clips generated from wearable devices? Lawyers and judges will increasingly find themselves grappling not just with what was said, but with whether the medium itself can be trusted.
2.2.On Harassment, Stalking, and Blackmail
Beyond defamation, the Cybercrimes (Amendment) Act, 2024 squarely captures several potential abuses. Section 24, now revised, criminalises messages that are knowingly false, pornographic, or calculated to cause a breakdown of law and order or pose a threat to life. This tightening was meant to cure earlier vagueness, yet it still extends to online harassment and malicious communications. For example, a user deploying the glasses to secretly track another, sending edited recordings to intimidate or embarrass them. Such conduct falls within cyberstalking as prohibited by Section 24, punishable with imprisonment of up to three years and/or a fine. Likewise, Section 22 of the Act criminalises extortion and blackmail. These are offences that fit squarely where a user threatens to publish compromising recordings unless paid off.
2.3. On Data Protection
The Nigeria Data Protection Act (NDPA) 2023 complicates the matter by defining a data controller in Section 65 as anyone who “determines the purposes and means of the processing of personal data.” On the face of it, the wearer of Ray-Ban Meta glasses fits this description, since he decides what to record and why. Yet Meta itself also determines the “means,” through its algorithms, servers, and storage systems. The law therefore leaves us with a troubling duality: both the individual and the company may be controllers at the same time.
This duality creates practical and legal chaos. Sections 24,25,26 of the NDPA imposes on every controller a duty of fairness, transparency, and lawfulness, while Section 30 demands that consent must be “freely given, specific, informed, and unambiguous.” But how can a Lagos commuter wearing these glasses possibly obtain consent from everyone caught in a recording at Oshodi market? And what becomes of consent when passersby do not even know they are being filmed? Either the individual user becomes a violator of the Act, or Meta shields itself behind contractual fine print while benefiting from harvested data. Unless Nigerian regulators address this ambiguity, the NDPA risks being reduced to a lofty but toothless promise.
2.4. On Intellectual Property
Under the Copyright Act 2022, creators hold exclusive rights over reproduction, communication, and adaptation (Section 9(1)). The AI glasses make infringement deceptively easy. For instance, a person who goes to the cinema recording a Nollywood film, or a fan live-streaming a concert. Such acts breach copyright, potentially qualifying as derivative works. Nigeria’s limited statutory exceptions (Sections 20–28, Copyright Act) do not provide broad “fair use,” meaning most unauthorized reproductions would constitute infringement.
The risks extend further to recordings of product launches or fashion shows could lead to trademark violations or passing off, while confidential business meetings could be compromised, invoking duties of confidence. Given Nigeria’s fragile creative economy which is already plagued by piracy in Nollywood, Afrobeats, and publishing, the subtlety of wearable tech deepens existing vulnerabilities.
Although the Copyright Act 2022 is robust, enforcement remains the challenge. Wearable devices demand anticipatory regulation to include clearer recording indicators, stricter educational licensing, and stronger penalties. The Nigerian Communication Commission and NDPC must adapt quickly.
2.5. On Employment Law
One of the less obvious but deeply consequential implications of Ray-Ban Meta glasses lies in the workplace. Employers, driven by efficiency and productivity, may begin to require employees to wear such glasses for tasks like warehouse monitoring, delivery tracking, performance evaluation, or even remote supervision. At first glance, this may appear progressive since it aids technology streamlining operations and reducing human error. Yet beneath the surface lurks the danger of turning the workplace into a zone of constant, intrusive surveillance.
The Nigerian Labour Act (Cap L1, Laws of the Federation 2004), though outdated in many respects, embodies a principle that still resonates viz: the protection of employees’ dignity. Section 7 of the Labour Act requires that the terms and conditions of employment be clearly defined in writing. If employers introduce surveillance technology like Meta glasses, failing to disclose the extent of monitoring may amount to a breach of this statutory duty. In essence, employees must know not only what they are employed to do but also how their conduct will be scrutinised.
Moreover, the Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023 (NDPA) comes into sharp relevance. Section 26 mandates that personal data processing in the context of employment must be lawful, fair, and transparent. Employers who monitor employees through smart glasses are “data controllers” under the Act, thereby bound to obtain informed consent, specify the purpose of monitoring, and ensure proportionality. Covert or excessive monitoring would breach these obligations, exposing employers to penalties.
- Conclusion
So the question is urgent: are these glasses simply another marvel of technology, or are they a Trojan horse, smuggled into our homes, our markets, our schools, carrying within them the seeds of a new form of control?
The Constitution under Section 37 guarantees privacy. Our courts, from Olatunbosun v. NISER (1988) 3 NWLR (Pt. 80) 25 to PENGASSAN v. Schlumberger [2008] 11 NLLR (Pt. 29) 164., have reminded us that fairness and dignity cannot be traded for expediency. Our Data Protection Act of 2023 sets a legal fence around personal information. Yet these protections are only as strong as our willingness to enforce them. If we look away, dazzled by novelty, we may find that the very values we hold dear have been eroded without our knowing.
The law must therefore rise to meet the challenge. Regulators must set clear rules for use, employers must resist the temptation of unchecked surveillance, and citizens must insist that innovation serve humanity, not diminish it.
Victor Sunday is a law graduate, writer, and orator.
Contact & Orders 📞 0704 444 4777 | 0704 444 4999 | 0818 199 9888 🌐 www.alexandernigeria.com
______________________________________________________________________
The books are available for purchase at:
Online: www.educodex.com | www.selar.com | www.amazon.com | www.mikeozekhome.com
Enquiries: +234 704 044 9375 | +234 814 813 4773 | +234 816 872 3532
Email: educodexl@gmail.com
______________________________________________________________________
“History of Rivers State Judiciary: A Compendium of Personalities on the Bench.” Authored by Ampim Gogo Blankson, Esq., Deputy Director at the Rivers State Ministry of Justice, in collaboration with the Rivers State Judiciary
💰 Cover Price: ₦20,000.00 (Twenty Thousand Naira)
Bukky Law Books, Rivers State High Court Complex, Moscow Road, Port Harcourt – 📞 08034868754📞 08034729738📞 Enquiries
______________________________________________________________________
Explore Nigeria’s Constitutional System — 17 Chapters, 924 Pages Of Insight By Prof. Hagler Sunny Okorie
