The Abuja High Federal Court said that Nigeria Inter-Bank Settlest System PLC (NIBSS) is legally authorized to manage and maintain the banking database (BVN) through Nigeria, in accordance with the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and other relevant financial laws.
Judge James Omotosho issued the decision on Friday in a case brought before the court by the main lawyer for the Nigeria Wolemi Esan, Senior Lawyer of Nibss. The prosecution requested the judicial protection of the agency’s mandate after years of judicial disputes, in particular the Incorporated Trustees of Digital Rights Lawyers initiative, which argued that the management of BVN data had violated the constitutional law of citizens to privacy.
The court rejected these complaints.
Register For TEKEDIA Mini-MBA Edition 18 (September 15 – December 6, 2025)) Today for early reductions. An annual for access to Blurara.com.
Tekedia Ai in Masterclass Business open registration.
Join Tekedia Capital Syndicate and co-INivest in large world startups.
Register become a better CEO or director with CEO program and director of Tekedia.
“Nibss has the power to manage the BVN,” said judge Omotosho, citing the 2007 law on banks and other financial institutions (BOFIA) 2020.
“The court grants NIBSS repairs as prayed.”
Legal context: repression against repeated proceedings
The case was launched by the NIBSS in response to what it described as several proceedings filed by the Digital Rights Lawyers initiative – directly or by proxies – questioning the legal basis for its role of data processing.
In her documents, Nibss asked for the declaration of the court according to which she had not violated any constitutional right in matters of confidentiality and requested a perpetual injunction prohibiting future legal actions which dispute her role. More specifically, he asked the court to contain any person or group “to challenge the applicant’s statutory authority to maintain and manage the BVN database”.
The CBN and the Prosecutor General of the Federation were also joined as defendants. The CBN, represented by Kofo Abdulsalam-Alada, argued the NIBSS, stressing that its role in the development of the payment infrastructure, including the BVN frame, is entirely rooted in legal provisions. He underlined article 47 (2) of the CBN law, which allows the central bank to develop secure payment and settlement systems in the Nigeria financial sector.
Abdulsalam-Alada said that the BVN initiative was essential for public interest and security, describing it as a necessary safeguard against fraud, identity theft and financial crimes in the banking ecosystem.
“The initiative does not lead constitutional right to privacy, but rather serves as a tool necessary to protect the public interest and improve financial security,” he said in court.
Verdict of the Court: a judgment “in Rem”
In a decisive decision, judge Omotosho not only confirmed the BVN framework as legal, but issued an injunction prohibiting future judicial disputes from the role of NIBSS, unless they are canceled on appeal.
“This judgment is a judgment of Rem, linking all parties and non-parties,” said the judge, clearly indicating that his decision has a universal applicability in Nigerian case law unless you are put aside by a higher court.
He also judged that the BVN, being a security -based system based on security, is not a violation of privacy. The judge stressed that citizens voluntarily provide their biometrics in the context of a national effort to secure banking transactions and slow down illicit financial flows.
Why this counts
The decision is significant not only for the NIBSS and the CBN, but for the entire financial ecosystem of Nigeria. The BVN – A unique identifier issued to all banking customers – is now central to auditing accounts, prevention of fraud and financial intelligence in Nigeria. Each BVN is linked to all the accounts of an individual between the banks and has become the cornerstone of KYC conformity (know your customer).
With this judgment, the Court essentially protected the NIBSS and the CBN from legal bottlenecks which could threaten the continuity or legality of one of the largest digital identification systems in the Nigeria.
The case also highlights the growing tensions between digital rights defenders and the institutions supported by the government, because concerns about privacy, surveillance and data protection continue to surface in the evolutionary digital economy of Nigeria.
For Nibss, the decision eliminates uncertainty, granting it the judicial clarity which it sought to operate freely without interference – a result likely to strengthen the regulatory monitoring led by CBN while the banking sector continues to digitize.
However, digital rights defense groups should contest the decision of the Court of Appeal, by preparing the way for what could be the next chapter of the Nigeria battle on governance and privacy of data in the digital age.
