The Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) has initiated legal proceedings against MultiChoice Nigeria Limited and its Chief Executive Officer, John Ugbe, concerning allegations of non-compliance with regulatory directives pertaining to subscription price modifications.
The FCCPC’s Director of Corporate Affairs, Ondaje Ijagwu, communicated this development in a statement on Wednesday, indicating that the commission has lodged formal charges at the Federal High Court in Lagos.
The allegations arise from MultiChoice’s decision to implement a subscription price increase for its DStv and GOtv services on March 1, notwithstanding a prior directive mandating the suspension of such an increase.
According to the statement, the regulatory body had, on February 27, directed the company to cease its proposed price escalation until the conclusion of an ongoing investigation into the issue.
Nevertheless, MultiChoice purportedly contravened the directive, prompting the commission to initiate legal action.
The charges against MultiChoice and its CEO are predicated on three principal allegations: obstructing the commission’s inquiry, failing to adhere to regulatory directives, and attempting to mislead the agency.
The FCCPC referenced specific infractions under the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act (FCCPA) 2018, encompassing Sections 33(4), 110, and 159(2), with penalties delineated under Section 159(4)(a) and (b).
The commission characterized the company’s actions as a direct affront to regulatory authority, which could compromise market equity and undermine consumer rights.
It further reproached MultiChoice for proceeding with the price increase prior to participating in an investigative hearing scheduled for March 6, 2025.
In addition to the litigation, the FCCPC is contemplating supplementary enforcement measures, including potential sanctions and regulatory interventions, to ensure accountability and compliance.
However, the company’s decision to advance with the increase in the face of regulatory objections has now culminated in a legal confrontation.
