Court Faults FCCPC’s Intervention in DStv, GOtv Subscription Increases

Alex Enumah in Abuja 

A Federal High Court in Abuja has faulted the intervention of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) in the recent increase in subscription prices of DStv and GOtv.

Justice James Omotosho, in a judgment delivered on Thursday, held that the federal agency cannot impose price control of goods and services without the approval of the president.

MultiChoice Nigeria, the parent company of DStv and GOtv, had dragged the FCCPC to court for intervening in its recent subscription price hike.

MultiChoice had in late February announced an increase in subscription rates of DStv and GOtv by up to 25% effective from March 1, 2025.

The organization stated that the increment was occasioned by rising inflation and operational cost. 

Responding, the FCCPC opposed the move, and called for regulatory review, while threatening sanctions on MultiChoice if it fails to shelve the planned price increase.

Miffed by this intervention, the firm approached the Federal High Court to challenge the powers of the agency to prevent it from increasing the prices of its goods and services.

But, the court in its judgment delivered on Thursday, dismissed the case of MultiChoice for been an abuse of court process, as similar proceedings were already pending elsewhere. 

The judge stressed that the plaintiff should have pursued its arguments in that court, rendering the current filing procedurally inappropriate.

However, Justice Omotosho noted that while the FCCPC has investigative powers under its establishing Act, it lacks the authority to fix or suspend prices unless specifically delegated by the president through a gazetted instrument. 

He observed that in the instant case, no evidence of such delegation was presented to the court.

“The power to fix prices is exclusively that of the president. Any decision taken without such delegation is a nullity,” he stated. 

Besides, the judge stated that Nigeria operates a free market system, and as such service providers like MultiChoice retains the right to set their prices, with consumers free to accept or reject them.

The judge further ruled that FCCPC’s actions, including directing MultiChoice to suspend its price increase, breached the company’s right to fair hearing and appeared selectively targeted. 

He dismissed the FCCPC’s claim that MultiChoice held a dominant market position, calling the argument untenable.

“The use of services like those provided by the plaintiff is discretionary and not essential. Nigeria can do without it,” he added. 

He warned that attempts to fix prices by regulatory bodies could scare off investors and harm the economy.

The court held that while the FCCPC may investigate market practices, it cannot impose price controls without proper legal backing.