Connect with us

Business

MultiChoice to pay N25m for disobeying tribunal orders

Published

on

Spread the love

The Competition and Consumer Protection (CCPC) Tribunal sitting in Abuja, on Thursday, awarded a N25 million fine against MultiChoice Nigeria Ltd, the operator of the satellite televisions, DStv and Gotv, for violating its restraining order.

The three-member tribunal, headed by Thomas Okosun in a ruling, held that having been found culpable of breaching its order, the company was liable to pay the penalty.

“The 1st defendant (MultiChoice) is in contempt of this tribunal.

“So we have reviewed the position of Section 51(3) of FCCPC Act, 2018 and in compliance with the provision of Subsection 2 of the same Section 51, we hereby order the 1st defendant, MultiChoice Nigeria Ltd, to pay the sum of N25 million only as administrative penalty for contempt of this honourable tribunal,” Okosun declared.

Shortly after the ruling, counsel for MultiChoice, Jamiu Agoro, however, pleaded for a date to hear his motion which, he said, was not due for hearing, but the tribunal declined to grant his plea.

“Until we are informed by the registry of your motion and once it is brought to our notice, if it is necessary, it will be heard,” he said.

Maduka College Advert

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the tribunal had, earlier, disagreed with MultiChoice over a notice of appeal the company brought to stay execution of the panel’s judgment.

The tribunal rejected the request by counsel for the firm, Jamiu Agoro, to hear his notice of appeal seeking an order of the panel staying execution of its judgment delivered on Tuesday pending the hearing and determination of the appeal before the Court of Appeal, Abuja.

Agoro, upon resumed of the proceedings, had informed that after the company reviewed the tribunal’s judgment delivered, the firm decided to appeal the said decision.

He said two applications were filed and “one is an application seeking for staying of execution.”

He, however, said that though an appeal had been filed, MultiChoice was already taking steps to comply with the judgment, directing its Managing Director, John Ugbe, and directors to appear with the 2021 audited financial report on Sept. 8 (today).

The lawyer explained that there was no management staff of the company in Abuja at present that could have brought the report.

“In view of our motion for stay of execution which has been served on all parties, we pray that you set the motion down for hearing for the tribunal to look at our application if it is meritorious or not,” he said.

But the tribunal disagreed with Agoro, saying the business of the day was for the company’s management to appear before it with the audited report.

Besides, the panel said there was no motion on appeal before it.

“You know the law counsel. First, those papers are not with us. The only reason we are here this morning is to make pronouncement on the penalty the 1st defendant (MultiChoice) is to pay.

“It is your right to appeal. The only point I took from you is that you don’t have your details here, rather than raising issues of appeal,” Okosun said.

The tribunal then stood down the matter to take it decision.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the tribunal, had, on Tuesday, delivered it judgment in a suit filed by a lawyer, Festus Onifade and Coalition of Nigeria Consumers, on behalf of himself and others.

The claimants had sued the MultiChoice and the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) as 1st and 2nd respondents, shortly after the company, on March 22, announced its plan to increase price of its products from April 1.

The claimants prayed the tribunal for an order, restraining the firm from increasing its services and other products on April 1, pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice dated and filed on March 30.

And the tribunal granted the ex-parte motion, directing parties to maintain status quo ante bellum.

But despite the tribunal’s order, the company was alleged to have gone ahead with the price increase on DStv and Gotv subscriptions and other products.

Against this backdrop, the claimants, in a motion on notice asked the tribunal for an order directing the MD and the directors of MultiChoice to appear and show cause why they should not be committed to prison for willful disobedience of the order of the tribunal granted on the March 30.

They also sought an order, directing MultiChoice to pay 10 per cent of its annual turnover for failure to comply with the order in accordance with Section 51 (1) and 2 of the FCCPC Act, 2018 and under the inherent jurisdiction of the tribunal.

Onifade averred that MultiChoice had a penchant for disobeying order of court.

The lawyer, who was the 1st claimant, said he was a loyal and long time customer of MultiChoice with DStv account number: 41353565835.

And on April 11, the tribunal again ordered MultiChoice to revert back to the old prices by maintaining status quo of its March 30 order, pending the hearing and determination of the substantive matter, but to no avail.

But while delivering the judgment on Tuesday, the tribunal ruled that the MD of the firm and the directors should appear with the 2021 audited financial report of the company before it on Sept. 8 (today).

“The Managing Director and directors of the 1st defendant (MultiChoice) are to appear before this honourable tribunal on Sept. 8 with certified true copies of their audited financial report of year 2021,” the panel declared.

The tribunal said that the audited financial report would “enable the tribunal determine the appropriate penalty to impose on MultiChoice for being in contempt of the orders of this honourable tribunal made on March.”

NAN reports that Section 51 of the CCPT Act states that a corporate body is liable upon conviction for contempt of a fine not less than “N100 million or 10 per cent of its turnover in the preceding year.”

The panel refused to grant the claimants’ prayer to direct the firm to adopt a pay-as-you-view model of billing for all its products and services.

However, it directed FCCPC to investigate if the firm adopts the package for its products and services in other countries, especially South Africa, and see how same could be adopted in Nigeria, and publish its findings within six month of the order.

The tribunal, in the judgment, also refused to grant the prayers of the claimants, seeking for an order directing the firm to revert to old price regime.

The three-member panel held that the power to regulate prices of goods and services neither resides in the FCCPC, the regulatory agency, nor the tribunal, saying only the president of Nigeria could do so.

The tribunal also dismissed the claimants’ demand for a N10 million damages for unable to prove how they had suffered psychologically from the company’s act.

The panel, in the judgment, rebuked FCCPC over act of negligence to complaints by the consumers.

“The 2nd defendant (FCCPC) must also improve on its management of complaints from the public that it is established to serve .

“A situation where an aggrieved consumer does not get feed back on a duly filed complaint does not speak well for the country,” it said.

The tribunal, therefore, charged the commission to resolve all lingering issues between MultiChoice and numerous consumers of the products and services of the company.

NAN reports that Onifade, in an amended originating summons, granted by the tribunal on June 20, had sued the firm for N10 million damages.

The lawyer also sought the order directing and mandating MultiChoice to adopt a pay-as-you-view model of billing for all its products and services forthwith.

He further urged the tribunal to make an order directing the firm to make the local television stations in the country free and stop the company from cycled content.

But counsel for MultiChoice, Agoro, in a motion on notice, challenged the jurisdiction of the tribunal to hear the matter as the claimant lacked the locus to institute the action.

Jamiu had argued that the order of the tribunal made on April 11, asking MultiChoice to revert to old rates was made against a completed act, the firm, having increased its tariffs on April 1.

The lawyer argued that MultiChoice with  had already configured all their devices for the increase in tariff to take effect before the tribunal made its order.

Agoro added that there was no evidence presented before the tribunal of damage that the claimant had suffered.(NAN)

Business

Pipeline sale controversy deepens as expert warns of investor confidence risks

Published

on

Spread the love

Fresh controversy has erupted over efforts to revive the sale of a 40 per cent stake in the Amukpe–Escravos Pipeline, with a governance expert warning that any attempt to resurrect a previously terminated transaction could damage investor confidence and raise fresh questions about transparency in Nigeria’s oil and gas sector.

Speaking on Channels Television on Thursday, June 11, 2026, Managing Director of Policy Management Consult Services, Jide Olatuyi, said concerns surrounding the transaction extend beyond commercial interests and strike at the heart of governance, transparency, and the credibility of Nigeria’s investment environment.

“The contract was terminated,” Olatuyi said. “What stakeholders are saying is that there is a need for a new competitive bidding process rather than attempting to revive a failed transaction.”

The controversy has intensified amid scrutiny of the asset’s valuation. The earlier transaction involving the 40 per cent stake was priced at approximately $243 million before collapsing over unmet contractual obligations. Independent assessments conducted in 2025 reportedly valued the same stake at between $544 million and $641 million.

The significant disparity between the earlier transaction price and the more recent valuations has fuelled calls for a fresh competitive bidding exercise to ensure that the asset reflects prevailing market conditions and delivers maximum value.

Rejecting suggestions that opposition to the proposed transaction is driven by sentiment or commercial rivalry, Olatuyi insisted that the debate centres on governance standards within the petroleum industry.

Maduka College Advert

“I don’t think it is about sentiment at all,” he said. “It is about governance in the oil and gas sector.”

According to him, Nigeria’s challenge is no longer limited to attracting investors but also ensuring that investors have confidence in the integrity of the country’s commercial and regulatory processes.

“If you are not committed to transparency, it becomes a problem for investors,” he said. “If you cannot build trust and confidence in the sector, capital will go elsewhere.”

Olatuyi said several stakeholders, including project lenders such as Sterling Bank and AMCON, have advocated a transparent process that reflects current market realities and updated asset valuations.

The Amukpe–Escravos Pipeline, which has a transportation capacity of about 160,000 barrels per day and has maintained uptime above 95 per cent, remains one of Nigeria’s most strategic crude evacuation assets. The pipeline plays a critical role in transporting crude from inland production fields to export terminals in the Niger Delta.

Olatuyi urged authorities to ensure that any future transaction involving the asset is conducted through an open, transparent, and competitive process capable of inspiring investor confidence and safeguarding public value.

The debate comes at a time when the Federal Government is seeking to attract substantial investment into the energy sector and expand critical oil and gas infrastructure.

The eventual outcome of the Amukpe–Escravos Pipeline transaction could serve as a major test of Nigeria’s commitment to transparency, valuation discipline, and investor protection. As global competition for energy capital intensifies, governance standards may prove just as important as resource endowment in determining where investment flows.

Officials of the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission and members of the technical committee that supervised the original transaction did not respond to requests for comment as of press time.

Continue Reading

Business

S/East companies shutting down over rising energy costs — MAN

Published

on

Spread the love

The Manufacturers Association of Nigeria (MAN) has raised alarm over the worsening state of manufacturing activities in the South-East, warning that rising energy costs and poor access to finance are forcing many companies in the region to shut down.

Chairman of MAN for Anambra, Enugu and Ebonyi states, Lady Ada Chukwudozie, disclosed this during the MAN South-East Stakeholders’ Industry Conversation held in Awka, Anambra State.

The forum was convened to address concerns surrounding electricity regulation, billing transparency and declining industrial productivity across the region.

Chukwudozie said the few factories still operating were doing so at less than 30 per cent of installed capacity due to soaring electricity tariffs, high energy costs and limited access to credit facilities.

According to her, the harsh operating environment informed the decision to convene the stakeholders’ roundtable, stressing that the manufacturing sector remains critical to economic growth, industrialisation and job creation.

She warned that unless urgent measures are taken to address the challenges confronting manufacturers, industrial activities in the South-East could further deteriorate, with serious implications for employment and regional economic stability.

Maduka College Advert

“The manufacturing sector cannot thrive in an environment of uncertainty,” she said.

She called for reforms in the power sector to be driven by transparency, accountability and measurable performance standards, including agreed electricity supply hours, actual delivery levels and compensation mechanisms where supply consistently falls below expectations.

Chukwudozie also urged regulatory authorities to strengthen oversight of electricity providers and improve power supply to industrial clusters across the South-East.

Stakeholders at the forum expressed concern that manufacturers were increasingly struggling to cope with escalating production costs, worsened by unreliable electricity supply and the rising cost of alternative energy sources.

They noted that without affordable and stable energy, many more companies could either scale down operations or shut down completely.

In his keynote address, former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission, NERC, Dr. Sam Amadi, urged governments in the South-East to adopt deliberate policies aimed at prioritising electricity supply to industrial clusters.

Amadi also advocated pricing frameworks that would encourage manufacturers to expand production and invest in growth.

The stakeholders’ meeting brought together manufacturers, regulators and other industry players to explore practical solutions to revive industrial output and tackle persistent power challenges affecting businesses in the region.

Continue Reading

Business

Amukpe-Escravos pipeline and the real cost of ignoring current value, By Sufuyan Ojeifo

Published

on

Spread the love

Nigeria’s oil infrastructure has a habit of telling uncomfortable truths. Not just about barrels and flow rates, but about how a country chooses to value what it cannot afford to lose, and what it risks when it gets that calculation wrong.

Take the Amukpe-Escravos Pipeline, for example. A syndicate of lenders, led by Sterling Bank, is pushing back against efforts to revive a collapsed transaction involving a 40% stake in the asset. Their argument is not complicated. It is rooted in numbers and contractual discipline.

To be clear, a deal that fell apart in 2024 is being reconsidered using a valuation from that same year. However, since then, the asset has proved its worth. Independent assessments now place that stake closer to $600 million. The earlier benchmark sits far below that. The gap is not cosmetic. It is material. And if left unaddressed, it becomes a cost.

The original $243 million offer did not collapse by accident. It was terminated in October 2024 after Conpurex Limited failed to meet payment obligations, breached key terms, and sought to shift risk back to the seller. By the time the Technical Committee closed the process, confidence had already drained out of it. That much is settled.

Ordinarily, that should have been the end. Instead, there are moves to return to a September 2025 approval linked to that same process. The lenders describe this as an administrative carryover. Their response is simple. Start again. Set aside the old approval. Bring in an independent adviser. Return the asset to the market and let current value speak.

What is striking is not just the position itself, but how unusual it sounds in the Nigerian context. In a system where strategic assets have too often travelled through corridors of convenience, an insistence on valuation and process can sound almost rebellious. It should not be so.

Maduka College Advert

Because this is not entirely about one pipeline. It is about whether a terminated deal remains terminated. Whether contracts still mean what they say. Whether performance counts for anything once the paperwork has been filed away. And, crucially, who bears the cost when value is ignored.

The numbers, as always, are blunt. A 2025 independent valuation, referenced in the March 2026 edition of Africa Oil+Gas Report, places the 40% stake at a mid-case of $372 million, a high case of $544 million, and an upside of $641 million. These are not speculative figures. They reflect an asset that has quietly done its job in a difficult environment.

With a capacity of 160,000 barrels per day and uptime consistently above 95%, the Amukpe-Escravos Pipeline has become one of the more reliable evacuation routes in a system where reliability is often in short supply. While other corridors struggle with theft and disruption, this one works.

That fact matters a great deal. Because when an asset proves itself under pressure, its value does not stand still. It moves. To price it as though nothing has changed is not just a technical choice. It is a financial one. And every financial choice has consequences.

It says performance can be ignored. It says time does not count. It says administrative continuity can outrun economic reality. To be fair, the earlier process gave enough warning signs. Lenders questioned the assumptions. Coordination was weak. When Continental Oil and Gas stepped back, Conpurex entered without a clean transition and soon began to reopen settled terms, shifting obligations and introducing new conditions that unsettled the commercial balance. The eventual termination was not dramatic. It was inevitable.

What unsettles stakeholders now is the possibility that a process that ran its course may still shape the outcome. If a concluded transaction can reappear without a clear restart, the line between closure and continuity begins to blur. Once that line blurs, contractual uncertainty follows. And when certainty weakens, serious capital takes notice.

This is where the issue widens beyond the pipeline itself. Back in March, Africa Oil+Gas Report described the Amukpe-Escravos matter as no longer just a transaction story, but a test of how Nigeria governs, values, and safeguards strategic oil infrastructure. That reading feels even more relevant now.

Because what is at stake is not simply who acquires a stake in a pipeline. It is how the country signals to those willing to invest in its most critical assets. It is about whether value is recognised only in theory, or protected in practice. It is about whether losses are acknowledged, or quietly absorbed.

The lenders’ position is often described as resistance. It is better understood as discipline. Reset the process. Revisit the approval. Bring in independent oversight. Return the asset to the market through a transparent and competitive process that reflects present realities. Ensure capable counterparties. Align all stakeholders.

These are not extravagant demands. They are the basics. Nigeria has seen too many assets drift from promise to regret. Too many structures that once worked reduced to cautionary tales. When something works, when something proves resilient in a difficult system, the least that can be done is to treat it with the seriousness it has earned.

Moments like this do not announce themselves as turning points. They arrive quietly, dressed as routine decisions.

But they reveal everything. For an economy seeking disciplined capital and trying to rebuild confidence, the signal matters. Let the process be reset. Let valuation reflect reality. Let the outcome show that when Nigeria recognises value, it also knows how to protect it, and what it stands to lose when it does not.

Until then, the lenders’ position stands as a reminder that in a system where too much has been taken for granted, some lines are too important to be crossed and must be held.

● Sufuyan Ojeifo publishes THE CONCLAVE online newspaper.

Continue Reading

Trending

Maduka College Advert