The Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) has initiated legal proceedings against MultiChoice Nigeria Limited and its Chief Executive Officer, John Ugbe, for allegedly violating regulatory directives concerning subscription price adjustments. This action stems from MultiChoice’s decision to proceed with a price increase for its DStv and GOtv services on March 1, 2025, despite the FCCPC’s directive to maintain existing prices pending an investigation.
On February 27, 2025, the FCCPC instructed MultiChoice to halt any planned price adjustments until the completion of an inquiry into its compliance with consumer protection regulations. However, the company proceeded with the price hike, leading the FCCPC to file charges at the Federal High Court in Lagos. The charges include willfully obstructing the commission’s inquiry by implementing the price hike contrary to directives, impeding an ongoing investigation by ignoring instructions to suspend the increase, and attempting to mislead the commission by proceeding without addressing objections.
In response, MultiChoice filed a lawsuit on March 3, challenging the FCCPC’s authority to regulate prices or to suspend its price adjustments. The company argued that Nigeria operates a free market economy where prices of goods and services are not regulated, and that the FCCPC Act and other relevant laws do not grant the commission the authority to regulate prices or require businesses to seek approval before adjusting the cost of their services.
Consumer advocacy groups have expressed concern over the disparity between subscription prices in Nigeria and those in other countries, particularly South Africa. They argue that Nigerian consumers are being unfairly charged higher rates and have called on the FCCPC to take decisive action to protect consumer rights. The ongoing legal battle between the FCCPC and MultiChoice highlights the complexities of regulating pricing in a free market economy and raises important questions about the balance between corporate autonomy and consumer protection.
The outcome of this case could set a significant precedent for regulatory oversight in Nigeria’s pay-TV industry and may influence how subscription-based services adjust their pricing structures in the future. As the legal proceedings unfold, stakeholders and consumers alike are keenly observing the developments, anticipating a resolution that ensures fair market practices while respecting the principles of a free market economy.
