In a significant move reflecting Nigeria’s commitment to consumer protection, the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) has initiated legal action against MultiChoice Nigeria, the country’s leading pay-TV provider, and its Chief Executive Officer, John Ugbe. The lawsuit arises from allegations that MultiChoice proceeded with a subscription price increase for its DStv and GOtv services, despite explicit regulatory directives to maintain existing pricing structures pending a comprehensive review.
On February 24, 2025, MultiChoice announced a price adjustment for its subscription packages, scheduled to take effect on March 1, 2025. This decision prompted the FCCPC to intervene, directing MultiChoice to suspend the planned price hike until the completion of an ongoing investigation into the company’s pricing practices. The commission expressed concerns over potential market dominance abuse and anti-competitive behavior, highlighting that Nigerian consumers have faced frequent price increases, raising questions about fairness and possible exploitation.
Despite these directives, MultiChoice implemented the new pricing on March 1, 2025, leading the FCCPC to file charges against the company and its CEO. The commission accused MultiChoice of willfully obstructing its inquiry by proceeding with the price hike contrary to regulatory instructions, actions that violate sections of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act (FCCPA) 2018.
You Should Also Read; Lagos Airport Runway Shuts Down for Urgent Repairs: What Travelers Need to Know 
This legal action underscores the FCCPC’s dedication to enforcing regulatory compliance and safeguarding consumer interests in Nigeria. The commission’s proactive stance aims to ensure fair competition within the pay-TV industry and prevent potential exploitation of consumers through unjustified price increases.
The outcome of this lawsuit could set a precedent for corporate regulatory adherence in Nigeria, emphasizing the importance of aligning business practices with established legal frameworks. As the case unfolds, it will be closely watched by industry stakeholders and consumers alike, reflecting broader efforts to promote transparency and fairness in the Nigerian market.
In conclusion, the FCCPC’s decision to sue MultiChoice Nigeria highlights the critical role of regulatory bodies in maintaining market equilibrium and protecting consumer rights. This development serves as a reminder to corporations operating in Nigeria of the necessity to comply with regulatory directives and consider the broader implications of their pricing strategies on consumers and the market at large.
CSNlaAT FIBWv LbM