The Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) has taken legal action against MultiChoice Nigeria Limited and its Chief Executive Officer, John Ugbe, over alleged violations of regulatory directives and obstruction of an ongoing investigation.
The Commission accused MultiChoice of breaching the provisions of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act (FCCPA) 2018, raising serious concerns about the pay-TV giant’s compliance with Nigerian regulatory standards.
The FCCPC’s move comes as part of its broader effort to clamp down on anti-competitive practices and protect consumers in Nigeria’s pay-TV industry, where MultiChoice holds a dominant market position through its DStv and GOtv services.
Register for Tekedia Mini-MBA edition 17 (June 9 – Sept 6, 2025) today for early bird discounts. Do annual for access to Blucera.com.
Tekedia AI in Business Masterclass opens registrations.
Join Tekedia Capital Syndicate and co-invest in great global startups.
Register to become a better CEO or Director with Tekedia CEO & Director Program.
According to Ondaje Ijagwu, Director of Corporate Affairs at the FCCPC, the charges against MultiChoice include obstruction of an inquiry, impeding an ongoing investigation, and providing misleading information to the Commission. These alleged actions violate sections 33(4), 110, and 159(2) of the FCCPA, which could result in significant legal and financial repercussions for the company and its CEO.
The legal proceedings follow a series of regulatory disputes between MultiChoice and the FCCPC, primarily concerning the company’s planned price increases for its subscription packages. Last month, MultiChoice announced that it would raise the prices of its DStv and GOtv packages starting March 1, 2025. The adjustments included a 25% increase in the DStv Compact bouquet from N15,700 to N19,000, a 20% hike in the Compact Plus package from N25,000 to N30,000, and a rise in the DStv Premium plan from N37,000 to N44,500. The GOtv Supa Plus plan also saw an increment from N15,700 to N16,800, among other changes.
The announcement triggered an immediate response from the FCCPC, which summoned MultiChoice to explain the rationale behind the price review. The Commission ordered Ugbe to appear for an investigative hearing on February 27, 2025, expressing concerns over frequent price hikes, potential abuse of market dominance, and anti-competitive practices.
The FCCPC emphasized that maintaining the current pricing was crucial to avoid consumer harm during this challenging economic period. Despite these directives, MultiChoice proceeded with the price hike on March 1, 2025, leading to accusations of non-compliance and disregard for regulatory authority.
The House of Representatives has also waded into the matter, calling on MultiChoice to suspend its proposed subscription price increase in Nigeria pending thorough investigations. During a plenary session on Tuesday, the House adopted a motion of urgent public importance, which was moved by Hon. Esosa Iyawe, representing the Oredo Federal Constituency of Edo State.
The lawmakers mandated their Committee on Commerce to investigate MultiChoice’s “arbitrary” price hikes to ensure the implementation of cost-effective policies in the pay-TV sector. The committee was directed to report back within four weeks for further legislative action.
Regulatory Oversight or Market Control?
The legal and legislative scrutiny over MultiChoice’s pricing strategy has raised concerns among economists, who warn that the heightened regulatory pressure could deter potential investors. The fear is that such interventions might create a perception of an unpredictable business environment in Nigeria, particularly in sectors where price adjustments are part of operational sustainability. These concerns are not unfounded, as similar scenarios in other industries have led to capital flight and reduced foreign direct investments.
Analysts have argued that competition remains the only sustainable solution to the recurring issue of pay-TV pricing in Nigeria. They believe that fostering a conducive business environment for other TV service providers could introduce market forces that naturally regulate pricing through supply and demand dynamics.
The failure of locally-based satellite TV providers like TStv is often cited as a missed opportunity for healthy competition in the sector. TStv, which was launched with much promise to offer affordable pay-TV services to Nigerians, struggled due to a lack of government support and an unfavorable operating environment, ultimately failing to provide a viable alternative to MultiChoice’s dominance.
The FCCPC’s lawsuit against MultiChoice and its CEO at the Federal High Court, Lagos Judicial Division, is not just about enforcing compliance but also about sending a strong message to all market players. The Commission said it is keen to maintain market fairness and uphold consumer protection laws.
In addition to the legal proceedings, the FCCPC is evaluating further enforcement actions, including potential sanctions and regulatory interventions, to ensure MultiChoice adheres to consumer protection standards. The Commission reiterated its commitment to shielding Nigerian consumers from exploitative business practices while promoting a competitive market environment where dominant players operate under fair market principles and regulatory compliance.
The unfolding situation also sheds light on the broader challenges within Nigeria’s regulatory and business landscape. While regulatory bodies like the FCCPC are tasked with protecting consumers, analysts caution that over-regulation or inconsistent policies could harm the business climate.
Investors, both local and international, typically seek stable regulatory environments where business operations are not unduly hindered by policy changes or unpredictable enforcement actions.
Should the FCCPC succeed in its legal action, it could lead to significant consequences for MultiChoice, including financial penalties, operational restrictions, or a forced rollback of the price increases.
For consumers, a positive outcome could mean greater market stability and potentially more affordable pay-TV options. However, without meaningful competition, such regulatory victories might only offer temporary relief. This is why industry stakeholders are urging the government to create policies that support the entry and growth of other TV service providers, ensuring that consumers have real choices and that market forces can effectively regulate prices.