A Federal High Court in Abuja has barred the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) from taking regulatory action against MultiChoice Nigeria Limited over its recent subscription price hike for DStv and GOtv. Justice James Omotosho granted the order on Wednesday after reviewing an ex parte motion filed by MultiChoice’s legal counsel, Moyosore Onigbanjo (SAN), in case number FHC/ABJ/CS/379/2025. This ruling temporarily shields MultiChoice from FCCPC sanctions or interference in its pricing decisions until the court rules on the request for an interlocutory injunction. The development follows rising public concern over frequent price increases in Nigeria’s Pay TV industry and the FCCPC’s scrutiny of potential anti-competitive behaviour.
The FCCPC had earlier summoned MultiChoice to explain its decision to raise prices on March 1st, citing concerns about potential market dominance abuse and unfair pricing strategies. The commission had directed the company’s chief executive officer to appear for an investigative hearing on February 27th, warning that failure to provide a satisfactory justification could lead to regulatory penalties. MultiChoice, however, challenged the FCCPC’s authority to regulate pricing in a suit filed on March 3rd, arguing that Nigeria operates a free-market Economy where businesses are not legally required to seek government approval before adjusting service costs. The company maintained that its pricing structure is consistent with its operations in other markets, where subscription rates are determined by economic conditions and operational expenses.
MultiChoice argues FCCPC lacks authority over its pricing.
In its legal argument, MultiChoice insisted that the FCCPC lacks the power to compel it to suspend the price increase or justify its pricing model. The company further stated that its subscription rates in Nigeria are among the lowest compared to other countries where it operates. Gozie Onumonu, MultiChoice’s head of regulatory affairs, deposed in an affidavit that the Premium package in Nigeria costs approximately $29.81, significantly lower than the $85.11 charged in Kenya. Despite a pending court case, the FCCPC, through a letter dated March 3rd, threatened to take enforcement actions if MultiChoice failed to justify the price adjustment. In response, Justice Omotosho granted an interim order preventing the commission from imposing any penalties or taking administrative steps against the company, pending the full hearing of the matter.
Justice Omotosho also directed an accelerated hearing and adjourned proceedings until March 27th. The ruling provides temporary relief for MultiChoice, allowing it to maintain its new pricing structure while the court deliberates on the broader legal dispute over the FCCPC’s regulatory scope. However, the case could set a legal precedent for future regulatory interventions in pricing policies within Nigeria’s Pay-TV industry, as it raises questions about the balance between market competition and consumer protection. The FCCPC has long expressed concerns about MultiChoice’s dominance in the Pay-TV sector, where limited competition often leaves consumers with few alternatives. If the court rules in favour of MultiChoice, it could weaken the FCCPC’s ability to challenge price increases in industries where market forces alone do not always protect consumer interests.
Consumer protection and corporate accountability are at stake.
The dispute highlights broader concerns about consumer protection and corporate accountability, particularly in an industry where many Nigerians have expressed frustrations over frequent price hikes. While MultiChoice asserts its right to set prices in line with its operational costs and market conditions, critics argue that its dominant position allows it to impose price changes without real competition. Many consumers feel trapped in a market where limited service providers dictate costs, making affordability a growing concern. The legal battle may reignite discussions on whether stricter regulations are needed to ensure fair pricing and service quality, particularly in industries where monopolistic tendencies may affect consumer welfare. The FCCPC has often positioned itself as a watchdog against unfair Trade practices, but its role in regulating pricing remains a contentious issue.
Beyond the legal implications, the case underscores the challenges of balancing free-market principles with consumer protection in Nigeria’s evolving regulatory landscape. While businesses advocate for minimal government intervention in pricing decisions, regulatory bodies argue that unchecked market forces can sometimes lead to exploitative practices. The outcome of this case could clarify the extent of the FCCPC’s authority over private businesses operating in deregulated markets, setting a standard for future disputes involving pricing policies. If the court upholds MultiChoice’s argument, it may embolden other companies in various sectors to resist regulatory interference, potentially limiting the power of agencies like the FCCPC to hold corporations accountable for pricing decisions that impact millions of consumers.
Related Article: New satellite pay tv enters Nigeria market
For now, MultiChoice subscribers must brace for the increased tariffs, as the court’s order temporarily shields the company from regulatory intervention. However, the March 27 hearing will be crucial in determining whether the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission can proceed with its investigation or whether MultiChoice will retain full autonomy over its pricing decisions. With the rising Cost Of Living in Nigeria, many consumers are already struggling with affordability, making this legal battle particularly significant. The final verdict could shape future regulatory frameworks in Nigeria’s telecommunications and entertainment sectors, influencing how companies set prices and how much oversight regulatory bodies can exercise in protecting consumer interests.