The Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed a lawsuit filed by MultiChoice Nigeria, the operator of DStv and GOtv, challenging the regulatory authority of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission over its recent subscription fee hike.
Justice James Omotosho, who delivered the ruling on Thursday, described the suit as an “abuse of court process” and held that the case was duplicative, given that a similar matter is already pending before the Lagos Division of the same court.
“This suit is an abuse of court processes and a duplicity of actions,” Justice Omotosho stated. “The issues raised here can be dealt with in the Lagos suit already instituted by the FCCPC.”
MultiChoice had approached the court seeking a ruling on whether the FCCPC had legal authority under Section 17(a) of its establishing Act to prevent the company from adjusting its subscription rates. The firm also argued that the commission’s actions violated its constitutional right under Section 42, alleging discriminatory treatment.
However, the court held that while the FCCPC has investigative powers, it does not possess the authority to impose or suspend pricing without a specific directive from the President.
“The power to fix prices is exclusively vested in the President and must be exercised through a gazetted instrument,” Justice Omotosho clarified. “Any such action without proper delegation is legally void.”
More Read
The judge further stressed that Nigeria runs a free market economy where service providers like MultiChoice are at liberty to determine their pricing. Consumers, he added, are equally free to accept or reject those services.
“MultiChoice’s services are discretionary and non-essential. There is no evidence before this court to show that their pricing is excessive or that they hold a monopolistic position,” he ruled.
In rejecting the FCCPC’s claim that MultiChoice occupies a dominant market position, the judge said, “The mere popularity of a service does not equate to dominance or monopolistic control. Nigeria can operate without such services if necessary.”
He also cautioned that unauthorized attempts by regulatory bodies to interfere with pricing decisions could deter foreign investors and disrupt the nation’s economic principles.
“Regulatory overreach without statutory backing undermines investor confidence and the foundational principles of a free economy,” he concluded.
Justice Omotosho reiterated that the FCCPC may investigate and report on market activities but cannot enforce price control measures without presidential approval as provided under Section 88 of the FCCPC Act.
