In Kano, Nasir Abba Abdullahi has found a way to keep using TikTok when the app stops working. It involves switching on a virtual private network (VPN), and hoping the connection holds.
“We have been struggling on it, but it is not working,” he said of the disruption. “Sometimes it is working, and sometimes it is not working.”
Abdullahi says the problem has affected users in Kano, although he cannot explain what is causing it. His workaround, however, appears to help.
His experience captures an awkward feature of the TikTok disruption reported across parts of northern Nigeria. For some users, access appears intermittent. Others describe an app that has become practically unusable. Some have found ways around the problem, but the reason they need those workarounds remains unclear.
In Zaria, Abubakar Isa says TikTok stopped working around early September 2026, and that even a couple of scrolls can bring the experience to a halt.
“It is totally shut down. There’s no time. If you scroll one [or] two videos, it will stop,” he said.
Isa is also unconvinced by the security explanation he has heard. Asked whether he thought security concerns justified the disruption, he said he did not believe it was the right reason.
A TikTok user in Sokoto offers a different interpretation. He says he has experienced the glitches and is more willing to accept the security explanation, pointing to the insecurity affecting his state.
“I may agree with [the] government because it said a security issue caused this glitch and networking problem on TikTok,” he said.
Read also: ‘How I became my mum’s TikTok fact checker’
Three users, three accounts of the same broad problem, and no shared understanding of why it is happening. The dispute surrounding TikTok in northern Nigeria is increasingly about more than whether the app opens.
It is also about what users can establish for themselves when a service becomes unreliable, what they believe is behind the disruption, and how they respond when no explanation settles the question.
A shutdown without a clear explanation
The shutdown has now reached the Federal High Court in Abuja. On October 5, 2026, the Incorporated Trustees of the Foundation for Digital Justice and Sustainable Development filed an application against TikTok Inc., alleging that users in Kaduna, Kebbi, Kano, and Sokoto had been restricted from accessing the platform.
The application argues that the restriction violates users’ fundamental rights, particularly freedom of expression and protection against discrimination. It asks the court to declare the alleged restriction unlawful and unconstitutional, order TikTok to remove it, and require the company to publish a public apology in three newspapers within seven days of judgement.
The supporting affidavit places the disruption in September. It alleges that users in the affected states had been able to use TikTok alongside people in other parts of Nigeria before access became restricted.
The applicant says the disruption has prevented users from watching videos, refreshing their feeds, uploading content and participating in discussions on the platform.
The application raises a question that the users’ accounts also bring into view. If people in some states cannot reliably access a platform that users elsewhere can still use, who is responsible for explaining the difference?
The case points to the importance of TikTok beyond entertainment. The applicant argues that the platform has become a channel for journalism, business, political discussion, civic participation and the exchange of information. It says restricting access therefore affects users’ ability to express themselves, receive information and participate in public discourse.
That argument may sound abstract next to Isa’s description of scrolling through two videos before the app stops working. But the two are connected. A disruption does not need to look like a dramatic, nationwide shutdown to interfere with how people communicate or get information. For a user whose access keeps failing, the practical effect can be exclusion even when the app still works for someone elsewhere.
The legal complaint also frames the issue as one of unequal treatment. It argues that users in the four northern states have been denied access, while people in other parts of Nigeria continue to use TikTok without similar restrictions.
The applicant says this geographical difference raises questions under Section 42 of the Nigerian Constitution and Article 2 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, alongside the protections for freedom of expression under Section 39 of the Constitution.
Yet the court papers do not establish why the disruption is happening. That uncertainty is important, because an inaccessible app does not, on its own, prove who or what is responsible.
The documents attached to the application include a joint statement issued by civil society organisations on October 2. It says their preliminary investigations had not established whether the disruption resulted from a technical fault, a network-routing problem, a platform-side malfunction, traffic management or an intentional restriction.
The statement calls for an independent technical investigation and asks relevant authorities, telecom operators and TikTok to explain what happened.
It also argues that any government-imposed restriction should have a clear legal basis and that national security should not become a blanket justification for limiting access to online platforms.
Read also: No more TikTok night-time livestreaming for Nigerians — for now
What the VPN workaround tells us
Nasir’s experience offers a clue, although not a definitive answer. He says TikTok works normally when he switches on a VPN. A VPN routes internet traffic through another server, changing the route the connection takes to reach TikTok and usually the IP address the platform sees.
The fact that access improves when he uses one is consistent with a network-level restriction or routing problem that the VPN bypasses.
But it does not prove that the government or telecom operators are responsible. TikTok could also treat connections differently based on their apparent location, meaning a platform-side restriction cannot be ruled out.
Finding out where the disruption originates would require technical tests across different networks and locations, comparing access with and without a VPN.
If the same account and device can access TikTok through a VPN but not through a particular network without one, that would help narrow down the possibilities, although it would not settle the question on its own. The VPN workaround is evidence that changing the connection can make a difference.
Establishing why it works and who is responsible for the disruption requires further investigation.
The Sokoto user’s willingness to accept the security explanation reflects his experience of insecurity in his state. It does not establish that a security directive caused the TikTok disruption. Similarly, the Kano user’s use of a VPN demonstrates that he has found a way to access the platform, but it does not identify the source of the original problem.
The difference between those observations and an established cause is where much of the dispute sits. A network fault, a platform configuration problem and an intentional restriction may produce similar frustrations for an ordinary user, but they carry different implications for the people responsible and the remedies available.
Festus Ogun of FOLEGAL declined to respond to Condia’s questions, saying it was sub judice.
What the law and TikTok’s own rules say
The law leaves room for the government to address genuine security threats, but that power does not automatically extend to restricting access to social media.
Section 45 of Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution permits certain restrictions on fundamental rights, including freedom of expression under Section 39, where they are reasonably justifiable in a democratic society for purposes such as public safety, public order and national security. Section 42 separately prohibits discrimination on specified grounds, including ethnic group and place of origin.
Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, domesticated in Nigeria, protects the right to receive information and express and disseminate opinions within the law. TikTok’s own published Law Enforcement Guidelines and FAQs, last updated on January 22, 2026, offer additional relevant context.
TikTok says it assesses law enforcement requests for user data individually, requires a clear legal basis and rejects requests that fail to meet its requirements.
It also says it seeks to respect users’ privacy and freedom of expression. However, these guidelines concern the disclosure of user data, not government orders to block access to the platform. They neither authorise nor expressly prohibit the alleged shutdown.
The central legal question therefore remains whether the restriction was ordered or implemented, under what authority, and whether it can be justified under Nigerian law.