IS SOCIAL MEDIA THE NEW COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION FOR WORKPLACE DISPUTES IN NIGERIA? - By Clementina E. Ukiri, Esq.

The allure of social media as a platform to voice grievances and seek public support when facing workplace disputes is understandable. Employees may feel that traditional internal channels are ineffective or biased, leading them to take their complaints public in hopes of achieving resolution or holding their employers accountable[1]. However, while this approach may offer a sense of immediate validation, it is fraught with significant legal risks for the employee. This article explores the legal minefield of seeking redress online and the evolving landscape of digital evidence in Nigeria.

The Legal Minefield of Seeking Redress Online

 * Breach of Contract: As discussed previously, publicly airing grievances, especially if they involve confidential information or disparaging remarks, can easily violate the terms of an employment contract, leading to disciplinary action or termination[2].

 * Defamation: Allegations made on social media that are false and harm the employer's reputation can result in a defamation lawsuit. Even if the employee believes their statements to be true, they may still face legal action and the burden of proving the truth of their assertions in court[3]. Nigerian law recognizes defamation as both a civil wrong and, in certain circumstances, a criminal offense[4].

 * Cybercrimes: Depending on the nature and intensity of the online complaints, an employee could potentially be accused of cyberbullying or harassment, particularly if their posts target specific individuals within the organization. The Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc) (Amendment) Act, 2024 addresses various forms of online misconduct[5].

 * Damage to Reputation and Future Employability: Publicly "dragging" an employer can severely damage an employee's professional reputation and future career prospects. Potential future employers may view such online behaviour negatively, making it difficult to secure new employment[6].

Admissibility of Social Media Evidence: The Impact of the Evidence (Amended) Act 2023

A critical development that both employers and employees must be aware of is the Evidence (Amended) Act, 2023, which has revolutionized the admissibility of electronic evidence in Nigerian courts.

Previously, under Section 84 of the Evidence Act, 2011, admitting electronic evidence like social media posts was often a cumbersome process, requiring a certificate of authentication to prove the reliability of the device that produced the document.

The 2023 amendment has modernised this position significantly. The new Section 84 introduces a presumption of authenticity for electronically generated evidence. This means that documents like screenshots of social media posts, WhatsApp chats, emails, and direct messages (DMs) are now presumed to be authentic and admissible in court. The burden of proof has shifted: it is now up to the party challenging the evidence to prove that it is not authentic or has been tampered with[7]. An except of the relevant section of the Act is replicated thereunder.

Records in a computer to be admissible. - Section 84B of the Evidence (Amendement) Act, 2023 states as follows. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, any information contained in an electronic record which is printed on a paper, stored, recorded or copied in optical or magnetic media or cloud computing or database produced by a computer shall be deemed to also be a document, if the conditions mentioned in this section are satisfied in relation to the information and computer in question and shall be admissible in any proceeding, without further proof or production of the original, as evidence or any contents of the original or of any fact stated in it of which direct evidence would be admissible.

This change has profound implications. It is now substantially easier for an employer to present an employee's social media posts as evidence in a disciplinary hearing or in court to justify termination or seek damages. Conversely, employees must be acutely aware that their digital footprint can be readily and easily used in legal proceedings against them.

Whistleblowing vs. Online Complaining: Knowing the Legal Difference

It is crucial to distinguish between legitimate whistleblowing and simply venting grievances online. Whistleblowing typically involves reporting genuine wrongdoing or illegal activities within an organization to appropriate internal channels or external regulatory authorities, with the aim of rectifying the issue in the public interest[8]. The law often provides some protection for genuine whistleblowers against retaliation[9].

In contrast, simply complaining about general workplace dissatisfaction, airing personal grievances, or making unsubstantiated allegations on social media does not usually qualify as whistleblowing and may not afford the same legal protections[10]. In fact, such online conduct exposes the employee to the legal and disciplinary consequences outlined above.

                                                            Clementina E. Ukiri, Esq.

Conclusion: Think Before You Post

While social media can be a powerful tool, its use as a forum for workplace disputes is a high-stakes gamble in Nigeria. The legal framework, encompassing contract law, defamation, and cybercrime legislation, heavily favours formal dispute resolution. Furthermore, with the Evidence (Amended) Act, 2023 making digital evidence easier to admit in court, the risks for employees have never been higher. Seeking redress through proper internal channels or consulting with legal counsel is a far safer and more effective approach than resorting to the volatile and legally precarious court of public opinion.

References

[1]: De Stefano, V. (2016). The Rise of the Just Social Media Campaign. Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal, 38(1), 1-34.

[2]: Ojukwu, V. (2020). The Law of Contract in Nigeria. Princeton Publishing Co.

[3]: Elias, T. O. (2016). Nigerian Press Law. University of Lagos Press.

[4]: Defamation Law of Lagos State 2014.

[5]: Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc) (Amendment) Act 2024. s. 24.

[6]: Greenhouse, S. (2010). The Big Squeeze: Tough Times for American Workers. Knopf.

[7]: Evidence (Amended) Act, 2023, s. 84. This section replaces the more stringent requirements of the 2011 Act, introducing a presumption of integrity for electronic records.

[8]: Whistle Blowers Protection Act, 2017.

[9]: Ibid.

[10]: Lewis, D., & Callaghan, G. (2010). Whistleblowing: Towards a Global Framework. Edward Elgar Publishing.