Your Customer Left a Bad Review. You Called the Police. Here Is What Happens Next.

Across Nigeria, businesses are responding to negative customer reviews by involving law enforcement.In almost every case, they are wrong. They make mistakes legally, commercially, and strategically. Here is what the law actually says, and what you should do instead.

In April 2026, a Nigerian woman named Love Dshima posted a video online claiming that a loaf of bread she had purchased remained fresh for over two months on her shelf, a claim that raised obvious food safety concerns. The baker’s response was not to investigate the claim, issue a statement, or engage with the substance of what she said. Instead, the baker sued Doshima for N50 million, and then had her arrested.

The Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) moved swiftly. Its Director of Corporate Affairs, Ondaje Ijagwu, confirmed publicly that the Commission intervened to secure Doshima’s release from police custody. The FCCPC then engaged NAFDAC to independently analyse the bread sample she had referenced. What began as a viral consumer complaint became a regulatory investigation, into the baker, not the reviewer.

This outcome is not exceptional. It is the predictable result of a business owner using law enforcement to resolve what was, at its core, a product quality dispute. And it is playing out repeatedly across Nigeria as more businesses respond to critical online content by reaching for handcuffs rather than addressing the substance of what their customers are saying.

The FCCPC Director put it plainly in a subsequent interview: “There is no law in Nigeria that criminalises product complaints or product criticism.” He went further, calling on the Inspector General of Police to issue clear directives to curb the arrest of consumers over commercial disputes, saying: “Police in Nigeria have become an agency for all purposes, but they should not be used to intimidate consumers.”

This article explains the legal framework behind that position. It covers why negative customer reviews are not crimes, what the limited exceptions look like, what happens to businesses that cross the line, and what the correct legal response to a damaging review actually is.

The Constitutional Foundation: Nigerians Have the Right to Say This

The starting point is the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), which guarantees every Nigerian the right to freedom of expression under Section 39. This right includes the ability to communicate opinions, experiences, and views. It is not unlimited, the Constitution itself recognises that the right can be restricted in specific, defined circumstances. But those restrictions do not include being unhappy with a product you paid for and saying so publicly.

The FCCPA 2018 reinforces this at the statutory level. The Act grants consumers an express right to share their experiences with goods and services and to inform others about those experiences. This is not a soft guideline. It is a legally protected right, enforceable by the FCCPC, which has investigative and enforcement powers that it has demonstrated a willingness to use, including against businesses that attempt to suppress consumer feedback through intimidation.

These two legal frameworks; constitutional free expression and statutory consumer rights, together mean that a customer who posts a genuine account of their experience with your product or service is exercising a legally protected right. The question of whether their account is accurate is a separate legal question, with its own process. But the act of expressing dissatisfaction is not, in itself, a crime.

Why the Police Cannot Help You Here

The Nigerian Police Force is established under the Police Act for the prevention and detection of crime, the apprehension of offenders, the preservation of law and order, and the protection of life and property. It is not an enforcement mechanism for commercial disputes. It is not equipped, empowered, or legally authorised to arbitrate between a business and its customers.

A dispute about whether your bread stayed fresh too long, whether your restaurant served cold food, whether your delivery took three weeks longer than you promised, or whether your product failed to work as advertised, these are civil and commercial matters. They belong in the consumer protection system, in civil courts if necessary, and in the court of public opinion through your public response. They do not belong in a police station.

Nigerian courts have been consistent on this point. Decisions across multiple jurisdictions have held that the police have no business intervening in purely civil or commercial disputes. When a business owner presents a consumer complaint to the police as though it were a criminal matter, they are misusing the machinery of state, and the courts are increasingly prepared to hold them accountable for doing so.

The bread case is particularly instructive because it illustrates what happens when the regulatory machinery engages on the other side. The FCCPC did not investigate Doshima, it investigated the bread. The business owner’s decision to involve the police did not resolve the product quality allegation, it amplified it, gave it regulatory weight, and produced a NAFDAC investigation that would not have happened if the baker had simply responded professionally to a viral video.

What Would Actually Qualify as a Crime

 

There are circumstances in which an online review can cross the line into criminal territory. Business owners need to understand what those circumstances look like, because they are significantly narrower than most people assume, and the standard of proof required is high.

1. Criminal Defamation:For an online statement to constitute criminal defamation under Nigerian law, it must satisfy a demanding set of requirements. The statement must be false. It must have been published knowingly, that is, the person posting it must have known it was false when they posted it. And it must have been intended to cause reputational damage to the subject. Truth is an absolute defence. Fair comment on a matter of public interest is a defence. The honest expression of a negative personal experience, even if that experience is described in harsh terms, is a defence.A customer who posts ‘The packaging arrived torn, the food tasted stale, and the customer service was dismissive’, and who has photographs and receipts to support that account, is not committing defamation. They are telling the truth as they experienced it. The fact that this truth is commercially damaging to your business does not make it unlawful.
2. The Cybercrimes Act: Section 24 of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, Etc.) Act 2015 criminalises the use of computer systems or networks to send messages that are grossly offensive, pornographic, or of an indecent, obscene, or menacing character. Furthermore, the law prohibits the use of such technology for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult. It also covers actions intended to cause injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred, ill will or needless anxiety. Some business owners attempt to use this provision to have customers arrested for negative reviews posted online.Courts have been appropriately sceptical of this approach. The threshold for a Section 24 offence is not merely that a statement is negative, embarrassing, or commercially damaging. The statement must be of a character or purpose that the section specifically targets. A factual account of a poor consumer experience, posted on social media, Google Reviews, or any other platform, does not meet that threshold. Using the Cybercrimes Act to criminalise ordinary consumer feedback is a misapplication of the law.

The Legal Risk That Reverses Onto You

What most business owners do not anticipate when they involve the police in a consumer dispute is how quickly their own legal exposure escalates.

Section 46 of the Constitution guarantees every Nigerian the right to apply to the court for enforcement of their fundamental rights. When a business owner instigates the arrest or detention of a customer over a matter that constitutes a civil dispute, they may be held liable for the resulting consequences. In such cases, the business owner can be held jointly and severally responsible alongside the police for that unlawful detention.This is not a theoretical possibility. Nigerian courts have made such awards.

The exposure runs across three distinct channels. First, a civil claim for damages, for false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, and breach of fundamental rights, that can result in court-ordered financial awards that substantially exceed whatever commercial harm the original review caused. Second, FCCPC regulatory action for engaging in unfair, coercive, and intimidatory trade practices against a consumer. The Commission has made clear that it treats the use of law enforcement to suppress consumer feedback as a regulatory concern, not merely a legal one. Third, the reputational consequences of the arrest itself, which, in Nigeria’s social media environment, will almost inevitably become public and produce exactly the kind of national attention that no brand wants.

The bread case is a perfect example. The baker’s decision to arrest Doshima triggered a NAFDAC investigation, national media coverage, and an FCCPC intervention. Additionally, it created a public narrative that cast the business as a company that responds to safety concerns by arresting the individuals who raised them. That narrative is now permanently part of the brand’s story. No review, however damaging, could have done as much commercial harm as the response to it.

What a Legally Sound Response Actually Looks Like

Protecting your brand’s reputation is a legitimate business objective. The question is how you pursue it, and the answer is through professional, legal, and strategic channels, not through law enforcement.

• Respond publicly, professionally, and with facts: The most effective immediate response to a damaging review is often a measured, factual public reply. Acknowledge the customer’s experience and provide your own account of the facts where they differ. Additionally, offer to resolve any genuine issue, and do so in a tone that demonstrates competence and confidence rather than aggression. Courts of public opinion consistently favour businesses that respond transparently over those that respond defensively. A well-handled public response can neutralise even a viral complaint.
• Verify the accuracy of the claim before anything else: Before taking any legal step, establish whether the customer’s account is factually accurate. If it is, the correct response is to address the underlying product or service failure. If it contains material inaccuracies, document those inaccuracies carefully, you will need that documentation for any legal step that follows.
• Instruct your lawyer to assess the legal position: If you believe a review contains false statements of fact that have caused or are capable of causing measurable reputational or financial harm, obtain a proper legal opinion. The threshold for actionable defamation is specific. Your lawyer can assess whether the review meets it and advise on the proportionate legal response. This assessment should happen before any letter is sent and certainly before any contact with law enforcement.
• Issue a cease-and-desist letter if the legal threshold is met: If your lawyer confirms that a review contains defamatory falsehoods, the appropriate first step is a formal cease-and-desist letter, not an arrest. The letter formally puts the reviewer on notice of the civil consequences of continued publication, demands retraction, and creates a documented record that you pursued lawful recourse before escalating. Many cases resolve at this stage without litigation.
• Pursue civil litigation where actual damage is provable and proportionate: If a review contains verifiably false statements that have caused measurable financial harm; lost contracts, documented revenue decline, cancelled partnerships that can be traced to the publication, and the cease-and-desist has been ignored, civil litigation in a court of competent jurisdiction is the appropriate remedy. The burden of proof is yours to discharge. The damages must be real and calculable. And the cost-benefit of litigation must be assessed honestly against the cost of the reputational fight itself.
• Use the FCCPC’s own process. If you believe a consumer complaint was made in bad faith, not as a genuine expression of dissatisfaction but as a calculated attempt to harm your business, the FCCPC has a complaints process. The Commission is not exclusively a consumer-side body. It is a fair competition regulator, and bad-faith abuse of consumer rights frameworks is within its remit. However, the threshold for establishing bad faith is high, and this route is appropriate only where the evidence is clear.

The Broader Commercial Reality

The businesses responding to negative customer reviews with police involvement are making a strategic error that compounds the legal one. In the attention economy of Nigerian social media, an arrest generates more coverage than any review. The story that spreads is not the customer’s original complaint, however, it is the company’s response to it.

The FCCPC Director’s observation is worth sitting with: “Business owners seem to have made up their minds that nobody can hold them accountable.” That is the implicit message sent by every business that calls the police on a reviewer, that the business considers itself above ordinary commercial accountability, that customer feedback is an act of aggression rather than information, and that the correct response to criticism is intimidation.

That message reaches not just the customer who was arrested. It reaches every potential customer watching. And in a market where consumer trust is a fragile and hard-won asset, the cost of that message is almost always higher than the cost of the original review.

A negative review is a commercial problem. It requires a commercial solution, professional engagement, product improvement, responsive customer service, and where genuinely necessary, proper legal process. The solution is never handcuffs.

Dealing With a Damaging Review or a Consumer Dispute?

Starr Attorneys advises businesses on reputation management, defamation claims, consumer protection compliance, and FCCPC regulatory matters across Nigeria. Whether you are facing a damaging online review or a consumer complaint, we provide the legal strategy to respond properly, and protect your brand without exposing it to further risk.

+234 704 545 9409   |   info@starrattorneys.co   |   starrattorneys.co

The consumer who posts a bad review about your business is exercising a right the law specifically protects. The business that responds by calling the police is exercising a power the law specifically prohibits from being used that way. Understanding that distinction is not just good legal practice.  It is the foundation of operating a busine ss that can withstand honest scrutiny, which is, ultimately, the only kind of business worth building.

Written by: Leslie C. Ozoaka
Associate Lawyer
Starr Attorneys

Related Reading from Starr Attorneys

Dropshipping in Nigeria: The Legal Dangers Nobody Puts in the Sales Pitch

A Patent You Don’t Renew Is a Patent You Don’t Own

What Every Nigerian Business Must Know About Taxes

Statutory Time Limits: How Delay Can Bar Your Right to Sue

Starr Attorneys  |  Business Law Firm  |  Abuja  |  Lagos  |  Port Harcourt  |  Onitsha  |  Kano  |  starrattorneys.co