Human rights Lawyer and senior advocate, Mr Femi Falana has instituted a $5, 000, 000 (Five Million US Dollars) action before a Lagos High Court against a United State of America based organization, Meta Platforms Inc. over alleged invasion of his privacy by the company.

In the originating motion brought pursuant to Section 37 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and section 24(1)(A) and (E) & Section 34(1)(D) of Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023, Order 2 Rule 1 Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules, 2009, by his lawyer, Olumide Babalola, the human rights Lawyer accused the organization of publishing motion images and voice captioned, "AfriCare Health Center," in their website to the effect that Falana has suffered a disease known as ‘Prostatitis', which the lawyer claimed constitutes an invasion of his privacy as guaranteed by section 37 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999.

Falana claimed the publication and the video as released through the organization's platform, is "false, inaccurate, misleading and unfair to the Applicant and thereby violates the provision of section 24(1)(a) and (e) of the Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023."

Falana's lawyer prayed that the court should declare that the "Respondents continued publication of the Applicants name, still and motion images and purported voice on a page and video captioned “AfriCare Health Centre on their platform - to the effect that the Applicant suffered from a disease known as ‘Prostatitis constitutes an invasion of the Applicants privacy guaranteed by section 37 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999."

He is prayed the court for an order mandating the "Respondents to forthwith remove, erase and delete the video captioned “AfriCare Health Centre on their platform.

For the damages the publication has caused him, Falana, was asking for a general damages in the sum of $5, 000, 000 (Five Million US Dollars) and a consequential order that the court may deem fit to grant in the circumstance.

Falana who claimed that the published false video about his health status, which is his private life has rubished his image and the name he built over the years.

He argued that the publication by the Respondent which is false, offensive and disturbing paints him in a false light, that has caused him mental and emotional disturbances.