DIVORCE: ADMISSIBILITY OF DIGITAL EVIDENCE (WHATSAPP CHATS) IN NIGERIAN MATRIMONIAL PROCEEDINGS
By Babayemi Olaniyan Esq, LL.M, Notary Public, ACIArb(UK), ACIS
Introduction
The 21st Century has witnessed a growing reliance on digital communication. We live in a technological age where the use of devices and platforms for communication has become second nature. Today, much of our personal and family interactions take place through digital platforms, whether it is WhatsApp messages, emails, or social media posts. Unsurprisingly, these digital footprints are now becoming central in matrimonial disputes, where they are often relied upon to prove issues such as adultery, domestic abuse, or financial misrepresentation.
With the rise of social media and instant messaging, digital evidence has become a crucial factor in tipping the scales of probability in favour of one party. Such digital evidence includes, but is not limited to, WhatsApp messages, text messages, emails and digital photographs, each capable of revealing patterns of communication and behaviour.
However, the main question is not just whether this evidence exists, but whether it is admissible in court. In Nigeria, the admissibility of digital evidence hinges on strict compliance with statutory provisions, most notably the Evidence Act, 2011, as well as judicial precedents that stress the importance of reliability and proper authentication. This article examines the admissibility of WhatsApp messages in Nigerian matrimonial proceedings and what parties should know before relying on them in court.
Legal Framework
WhatsApp messages qualify as digital evidence under Nigerian law, and their admissibility is governed by provisions of the Evidence Act, 2011, particularly Section 84, which deals with computer-generated evidence. For WhatsApp chats (or similar digital records) to be admitted in court, the following conditions must be satisfied:
- Regular Use. The computer or device must have been in regular use during the period when the document containing the chats was produced.
- Regular Supply of Information. The type of information contained in the chats must have been regularly supplied to that device in the ordinary course of activities.
- Proper Functioning. The computer or device was operating properly during this time.
- Authenticity of the Information. The information in the document containing the chats was derived from information supplied in the ordinary course of use.
In place of calling a witness to testify about these conditions, Section 84(4) of the Evidence Act 2011 allows for a certificate of compliance. This certificate explains in detail how the document was produced and affirms that the computer or device was functioning properly.
It is imperative to note that courts have distinguished between “computer-generated documents” and documents merely typed on a computer, for instance, a Microsoft Word file. Computer-generated documents (like WhatsApp messages or data extracted from a device) must comply with Section 84 of the Evidence Act. In contrast, documents merely typed or printed using a computer (like a Microsoft Word document or a signed letter), are admissible without compliance with Section 84 because they rely on their originality, signature, or seal.[1]
Notably, Section 258 of the Evidence Act 2011 defines “computer” broadly to include any device used for storing and processing information, meaning that phones, tablets, and laptops all fall within its scope.
Judicial Authorities
Nigerian courts have had several opportunities to clarify how digital evidence, including WhatsApp chats, should be treated. In Kubor v. Dickson,[2] theSupreme Court held that computer-generated documents (including e-documents downloaded) from the internet are admissible only upon compliance with Section 84 of the Evidence Act. Because the Appellants in that case tendered documents from the bar without laying the proper foundation or providing a certificate of compliance, the evidence was rendered inadmissible.
In Dickson v. Sylva,[3] the Supreme Court reiterated the requirements of Section 84 and confirmed that a certificate can serve as a substitute for oral testimony in establishing compliance. Once such conditions are met, no further certification is necessary for admissibility.
These authorities affirm that WhatsApp messages and other digital communications are admissible, but only if the technical and procedural safeguards in Section 84 of the Evidence Act are followed. In other words, it is not enough to present screenshots or printed chats, the evidence must be properly authenticated to be accepted by the court.
In Mr. Felix olusegun orogun & anor v. Fidelity bank plc (2018) LPELR-46601(CA) the Court of Appeal stated that the device used must be tendered alongside the print out. This position might seem to conflict with section 84 of the Evidence which Act which clearly states out the requirement and exempts the tendering of the device itself.
Application to Matrimonial Proceedings
In matrimonial proceedings, WhatsApp chats and other digital evidence often become central when a spouse is trying to prove claims such as adultery, domestic violence, threats, or financial dishonesty. However, as the courts have stressed, it is not enough to simply print out chats or screenshots and present them in court.
To be admitted as evidence, the party relying on the chats must show that they are authentic and reliable. This can be done in two main ways under Section 84 of the Evidence Act:
- Through oral testimony. The person who extracted the message (or an expert) can testify in court to explain how chats were obtained and confirm their accuracy.
- Through a certificate of compliance. A written document that explains the process by which the chats were produced and confirms that the device was functioning properly at the time in accordance with Section 84(4) of the Evidence Act.
To strengthen a case, WhatsApp chats should ideally be supported with other evidence, such as photographs, call records, bank transfers, or witness testimony. Even then, the weight given to the evidence rests with the judge, who will consider whether the chats are credible and consistent with the overall case.
For anyone going through a divorce or custody dispute, this means that while WhatsApp messages can be powerful evidence, they must be carefully handled to avoid rejection in court. Proper legal guidance is essential to ensure that digital evidence is admissible and capable of supporting your claims effectively.
Challenges
While WhatsApp messages can help prove your claims in matrimonial proceedings, they are not without challenges. Some of the main concerns include:
- Susceptibility to manipulation.
Screenshots and forwarded chats can be edited, deleted, or taken out of context. Restoration tools can alter data, and metadata may be invisible without expert extraction. Without proper extraction or certification, the other party may argue that the evidence has been tampered with.
2. Technological barriers.
Features such as encrypted backups, disappearing messages or deleted chats can make it difficult to present a complete and accurate record to the court.
3. Judicial caution.
Nigerian courts are increasingly aware of the risk of digital forgery. Judges now scrutinise digital evidence more carefully and will only rely on it if the strict requirements of the Evidence Act are met. In spite of this, there is still a need for continuous judicial education and updated procedural guidelines.[4]
Conclusion
WhatsApp chats and other forms of digital evidence can play a decisive role in Nigerian matrimonial proceedings. However, they are only admissible if the strict requirements of Section 84 of the Evidence Act 2011 are met. Courts have consistently held, as in the cases of Kubor v Dickson (supra) and Dickson v Sylva (supra), that without proper certification or testimony confirming authenticity, such evidence cannot be relied upon. For parties involved in matrimonial proceedings, this means that WhatsApp messages must be carefully handled and properly presented to avoid being rejected by the court.
Babayemi Olaniyan is the Lead Partner of Lehi Attorneys and a family law expert with years of expertise in resolving family law matters.
Contact
Email: yemiolaniyan00@gmail.com, www.lehiattorneys.com
Caveat! The content of this article is for educational purposes and is intended to provide a general understanding of the topic discussed. It is not intended to serve as legal advice whatsoever. If the contents appeal to you and you would want further clarification on any of the points raised therein, do not hesitate to send a mail.
[1] Hon. Justice Alaba Omolaye-Ajileye, ‘Electronic Evidence: Simple Documents Generated From Computers Require No Authentication Under Section 84 Of The Evidence Act 2011,’ (6 July 2022) <https://thenigerialawyer.com/electronic-evidence-simple-documents-generated-from-computers-require-no-authentication-under-section-84-of-the-evidence-act-2011/?utm_source=chatgpt.com> accessed 15 August 2025
[2] (2013) 4 NWLR (Pt. 1345) 534
[3] (2017) 8 NWLR (Pt. 1567)
[4] Chaman Law Firm, ‘Powerful Insight: Challenges and Solution in Digital Evidence Admissibility in Nigeria,’ <https://chamanlawfirm.com/digital-evidence-admissibility-in-nigeria/?utm_source=chatgpt.com> accessed 15 August 2025