Meta loses bid to get out of rights violations case
The High Court has allowed a Facebook content moderator who has filed a petition alleging rights violations to serve the suit papers to social media giant Meta. PHOTO | SHUTTERSTOCK
What you need to know:
- In February, last year Mr Motaung sought the court’s permission to serve Meta at its physical offices and through email.
- After being served with the court papers, Meta’s parent firms will have 21 days to enter appearance.
Social media giant Meta has lost its bid to wriggle out of a suit filed by former content moderator Daniel Motaung, who claims that the multinational contributed to gross violation of their labour rights.
Justice Jacob Gakeri has allowed an application by Mr Motaung to serve Meta with the court petition at the multinational’s physical addresses in the United States of America and Ireland, and via email.
Mr Motaung and other content moderators were hired by Samasource Kenya (EPZ) Ltd, which is the first respondent in the suit.
Even though Mr Motaung has sued alone, the outcome of the case is expected to have a direct effect on more than 180 content moderators Samasource hired to moderate Facebook content.
Meta contracted Samasource to help moderate content on the popular social media platform.
In February, last year Mr Motaung sought the court’s permission to serve Meta at its physical offices and through email.
Meta opposed the application, arguing that dragging it into the case using Kenyan laws would violate the sovereignty of the US and Ireland because it is neither registered nor operating in Kenya.
The multinational added that Mr Motaung only had a contract with Samasource, hence there was no claim that could be made against Meta.
But Mr Motaung argued that Meta contributed to the rights violations as the multinational monitored and appraised the content moderators’ work.
Justice Gakeri said that Mr Motaung has accused Meta of contributing to violation of his labour rights and that only a hearing can determine whether the multinational is culpable.
“Admittedly, the petitioner (Mr Motaung) is not challenging that he had a written contract of service with the first respondent (Samasource). His case is based on allegations beyond the written contract of service on record and is seeking an opportunity to demonstrate evidentially that the 2nd and 3rd respondents (Meta US and Ireland) were significant actors and therefore part of the matrix on liability issues,” Justice Gakeri said.
“For the foregoing reasons, the court is persuaded that the petitioner has demonstrated that this is a proper case for the grant of leave for service out of Kenya, the judge added.
After being served with the court papers, Meta’s parent firms will have 21 days to enter appearance.
Justice Gakeri, in his ruling, noted that the hearing of the case has been slowed down by several applications and counter-applications. He also faulted the delays on attempts to settle the dispute out of court, a move that was marred by lack of good faith in the negotiations.
Samasource, which is facing the bulk of labour rights violation accusations in the suit, had its objection to the involvement of Meta in the case struck out after it filed a replying affidavit outside the four-day window granted by the court last year.
The Kenya National Human Rights and Equality Commission, Central Organisation of Trade Unions, Attorney-General, Ministry of Labour and Social Protection, Export Processing Zone Authority, Ministry of Health, Office of the Data Protection Commissioner, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Kenya Revenue Authority and Katiba Institute have been listed as interested parties in the case.
