MCSN Seeks to Vacate Ex Parte Order Freezing Levy Funds

Iyke Bede

Following the decision of a Federal High Court in Lagos to issue an interim order freezing copyright levy funds payable to the Musical Copyright Society of Nigeria (MCSN), specifically restraining the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and 20 commercial banks from releasing the funds, MCSN has reacted, stating that it will move to vacate the ex parte order.

Communication Manager of MCSN, Halim Mohammed, described the matter as routine.

“It’s no big deal. As a corporate body, disagreements are bound to occur between partners in the course of doing business, and parties may decide to seek the intervention of the courts,” he said.

He added that MCSN has taken steps to challenge the order.

“With reference to the garnishee order, MCSN has taken steps through our attorneys to vacate it. The order was obtained via an ex parte motion, which means we were not put on notice. We therefore have a right to seek redress and join issues with them, if any.”

Originally included in the 1988 Copyright Act but never put into effect, the copyright levy was reactivated under Section 89 of the Copyright Act 2022, making operational a long-standing provision meant to compensate creators for private copying and reproduction of their works across devices and digital platforms.The order followed a suit filed by the Record Label Proprietors’ Initiative (ReLPI), a not-for-profit organisation launched in 2023 with the aim of supporting the creative economy by representing Nigerian owners of sound recordings. It touts its credible status as overseeing an extensive catalogue of sound recordings dating back to the 1960s.

So far, it represents notable labels including Mavin Records, Davido Music Worldwide, Chocolate City Music, Universal Music Group, Sony Music Entertainment Africa, and Warner Music South Africa.

ReLPI is relying on Section 89(3) of the Copyright Act. The group says the section allows rights holders to receive payments directly, without going through a collective management organisation (CMO). It argues that its members are entitled to opt out of MCSN’s collection process.

However, the Nigerian Copyright Commission (NCC) had earlier authorised MCSN to collect the copyright levy. This approval was given before the lawsuit was filed. The commission recognises MCSN as the body approved to collect the levy for the industry. Section 89(3) protects the rights of individual owners, but it does not expressly stop the NCC from approving one CMO to handle collections.

Other copyright organisations exist in a similar capacity to MCSN. For instance, the Copyright Society of Nigeria (COSON), established in 2010, covers a substantial number of Nigerian artistes. However, the NCC handpicked MCSN, with industry experts noting its long-standing presence since 1984 as a likely factor in the decision.

Ultimately, the court order stops MCSN from accessing the funds for now, but it does not cancel the NCC’s approval. The next hearing will determine how the court interprets Section 89(3) and the NCC’s authority.

A substantive hearing is scheduled for March 12, 2026.