…Hails court decision on NCC’s Power To License Telcos

The Wireless Application Service Providers Association of Nigeria (WASPAN) has accused the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) of putting out a “factually selective” narrative that masks the true extent of the Federal High Court’s ruling regarding regulatory powers in the telecommunications sector.

Reacting to the judgment delivered by Hon. Justice A. L. Allagoa in Suit No. FHC/L/CS/760/2026, WASPAN noted that while the court dismissed its primary reliefs challenging the Digital, Electronic, Online or Non-Traditional Consumer Lending Regulations 2025 (DEON Regulations), the commission’s public statement omitted a crucial judicial finding that curtails the FCCPC’s authority.

In a statement issued by its Chairman of Regulatory and Partnership, Osa Umweni, the association stated that it was vital to place the accurate picture before the Nigerian public because the FCCPC’s account failed to reflect the full legal reality of the judgment.

“WASPAN respects the decision of the Court and reaffirms, as it has throughout this dispute, its unwavering commitment to the rule of law and the integrity of Nigeria’s judicial institutions,” the statement read.

And, added  “However, we consider it important to place before the Nigerian public and all relevant stakeholders the full and accurate picture of what the Court actually held today because the statement released by the FCCPC, while factually selective, does not capture the complete significance of this judgment.”

Highlighting what it called the missing piece in the commission’s public account, WASPAN pointed out that the court explicitly ruled against the FCCPC’s power to act as a sector licensor.

“What the FCCPC’s press release did not say and what WASPAN considers to be a critical finding of this judgment is this: the Court expressly held that the FCCPC does NOT have the power to issue licences,” WASPAN asserted, adding that the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) remains the sole regulator authorized to license operators in the telecom space.

The association emphasized that the court’s ruling establishes clear boundaries, finding that nothing in the DEON Regulations creates a telecom licensing regime or allows the consumer protection agency to self-vest licensing authority.

“The FCCPC may enforce the DEON Regulations in so far as they relate to consumer protection. It may not, under the cover of those Regulations or any other instrument, constitute itself as a licensing body for the telecommunications sector. Any attempt by the FCCPC to exercise licensing powers over WASPAN’s members will have no legal foundation, as affirmed by the Federal High Court today,” the association stated.

WASPAN also recalled that the court dismissed the FCCPC’s Preliminary Objection on jurisdiction, ruling in WASPAN’s favor that a valid pre-action notice was served, the suit disclosed a reasonable cause of action, and WASPAN acted under genuine fear in seeking judicial intervention.

Setting the record straight on the FCCPC’s claims of prompt compliance with judicial directives, WASPAN criticized the agency’s past conduct during the pendency of an interim injunction in April 2026.

WASPAN noted that the historical record shows the FCCPC publicly branded WASPAN and its members as a “desperate cartel” just two days after being restrained by the court—a term WASPAN condemned as “wholly inappropriate for a public institution that had just been restrained by a court of competent jurisdiction.”

Moving forward, the association revealed that it does not view the ruling as the end of the matter, confirming that it is reviewing the entire judgment alongside its legal counsel, Kemi Pinheiro SAN and the team at Pinheiro LP, to determine the viability of an appeal.

WASPAN maintained that several provisions of the DEON Regulations, as currently framed, impose obligations exceeding the consumer protection scope sanctioned by the court.

“We accept this judgment with the same composure with which we approached the court proceedings—not as combatants seeking to obstruct regulation, but as a lawfully registered industry body asserting the right of our members to operate within a clearly defined and constitutionally compliant regulatory framework,” WASPAN concluded.