A Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed a suit filed by MultiChoice Nigeria, operators of DStv and GOtv, challenging the intervention of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) in its recent subscription price hike.
Justice James Omotoso ruled on Thursday that the suit amounted to an abuse of court process, pointing out that similar proceedings were already pending in another court. He emphasized that MultiChoice should have pursued its arguments in that forum, making the current filing procedurally improper.
While affirming that the FCCPC has investigative authority under its establishing Act, Justice Omotoso clarified that the agency does not have the legal right to fix or suspend prices. He noted that such powers rest solely with the president and can only be exercised through a formal delegation documented in a gazetted instrument under Section 88 of the FCCPA — a document which was not presented in this case.
“The power to fix prices is exclusively that of the president. Any decision taken without such delegation is a nullity,” the judge stated.
He added that Nigeria operates a free-market economy, where service providers like MultiChoice are at liberty to set their prices, and consumers are free to accept or decline them. The judge also criticized the FCCPC’s directive to suspend the price increase, stating that it violated MultiChoice’s right to a fair hearing and appeared selectively enforced.
The court rejected FCCPC’s argument that MultiChoice held a dominant market position, calling it unfounded. “The use of services like those provided by the plaintiff is discretionary and not essential. Nigeria can do without it,” Justice Omotoso said.
He warned that arbitrary price controls by regulators could deter investors and damage the economy.
The court concluded that while FCCPC has the mandate to investigate market conduct, it cannot enforce pricing regulations without express presidential authorization.
MultiChoice had increased its subscription rates by up to 25 percent on March 1, 2025, citing rising inflation and operational costs. The FCCPC objected to the hike, demanded a regulatory review, and threatened sanctions — which led to the legal dispute.
In response to the judgment, FCCPC Director General Tunji Bello said the ruling affirmed the agency’s role in investigating exploitative pricing. He noted that the judgment clarified that the president can delegate price regulation powers to the FCCPC, allowing it to gather data and make recommendations.
