For these reasons and more, Senator Abaribe’s leadership in this legislative initiative is most timely. There is a dire need to resolve identified discrepancies, as well as resolve lingering questions over power supply efficiency, the wide metering gap, the offensive estimated billings system, and overall customers’ satisfaction. However, the true success of the Amendment Bill will depend on whether it brings tangible improvements in electricity access, reliability, and affordability for all Nigerians.
Given the persistent challenges in the power sector—ranging from generation shortfalls to distribution bottlenecks and widespread dissatisfaction with tariffs—the ongoing amendment to the Electricity Act, 2023, presents a timely opportunity to consult all stakeholders, including the Forum of Commissioners of Power and Energy, to address structural weaknesses, improve electricity regulation, and empower subnational actors in line with the decentralisation goals of the 2023 Act.
It is crucial that the review process be transparent, inclusive, and grounded in the real-life experiences of electricity consumers, particularly those in underserved communities. Stakeholder consultations—including with state governments, independent power producers, civil society organisations, and consumer protection groups—are essential to ensure that the amendment results in a more equitable and efficient power system.
One major concern is the Federal Government’s failure to pay electricity subsidies, which has prompted indications that NERC may be charging Band A customers about N50/kWh above cost-reflective levels in an attempt to keep the electricity market theoretically liquid. This approach is problematic. It raises questions about long-term sustainability, investor confidence, and the future of state-level electricity regulation in Nigeria. This issue arises amid a broader push for the Federal Government to raise tariffs for Band B to E customers. Beyond this problem, many Nigerians still consider banding, on account of the duration of power supply, as fraudulent and exploitative of Nigerians.
Ordinarily, all subscribers to power distribution companies are entitled to a steady, uninterrupted supply whenever feasible. If this becomes unattainable due to the fault of the DisCos or the GenCos, there is no reason to visit the punishment on subscribers who are lucky to be supplied with more regular power. The system of ‘pay as you go’ ought to be fully established such that subscribers enjoying more electricity than others will simply pay more, particularly if they are justly metered, and not asked to pay a higher rate than the less lucky subscribers. This is why Nigerians have often embarked on group protests against Band A. The banding system should be abolished for its discriminatory and exploitative character.
While stakeholders have expressed concerns about the assumptions behind the state-level pricing and its potential consequences—particularly with regard to the burden of existing subsidies and market liabilities—EERC, one of the first state-level regulators to set tariffs under the new Electricity Act, estimated the electricity generation cost for the next five years at N45/kWh. This represents a dramatic deviation from the current average of N112/kWh.
This clearly shows that the Enugu State Electricity Regulatory Commission (EERC) is effectively requesting the Federal Government to shoulder a 60 percent shortfall, or an average subsidy of N67/kWh. It appears that the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) implemented a N50/kWh differential in Band A tariffs to offset shortfalls from other customer categories.
This development is tantamount to “robbing Peter to pay Paul.” It suggests that NERC has maintained a system of cross-subsidization, effectively passing the burden of market inefficiencies onto a limited group of consumers. As a result, many end-users are being pushed off the grid due to the high cost of electricity.
This is unacceptable. The imbalance in electricity tariffs in Nigeria has rightly triggered wide-ranging debate, as it touches on issues of equity, economic justice, and good governance. Many Nigerians are concerned that the current tariff system disproportionately burdens certain regions, consumer categories, or income groups, while offering preferential treatment to others.
Ultimately, the electricity tariff debate is not just about pricing—it is about fairness, reliability, and the urgent need for reforms that put citizens first. Any sustainable solution must prioritize affordable access to electricity for all Nigerians while also addressing the inefficiencies and corruption plaguing the power sector. Moreover, the rationale behind the so-called “service-based” tariff system—where consumers are charged based on the number of hours of electricity supplied—is often called into question, especially when the promised hours of electricity are not reliably delivered.
The lack of transparency in how tariffs are determined and the failure to involve the public meaningfully in the process further erode public trust and regulatory accountability.
The bottom line is that a country as large and resource-rich as Nigeria should not be suffering from erratic electricity supply in the 21st century. Power is critical to every sector—manufacturing, agriculture, healthcare, education, ICT, and households. Nigeria cannot attract meaningful development aid or strategic partnerships if it continues to struggle with unreliable power supply.
As a regulatory body, NERC has the mandate to regulate and oversee the electricity industry in Nigeria, ensuring compliance with established standards and consistent power delivery.
Therefore, the commission should seriously reconsider the increase in electricity tariffs. Why should there be a tariff hike when there is no commensurate improvement in electricity supply? The issue is not whether tariffs should be increased—it is whether such increases can be justified amid a persistent, erratic power supply. If Nigeria’s epileptic electricity supply has already devastated the economy, why should struggling businesses and households be compelled to pay higher rates?
In a country where electricity is already unreliable, asking citizens to pay more without delivering improved service amounts to injustice and exploitation. This imbalance not only deepens socio-economic inequality but also undermines public trust in regulatory institutions like the NERC.
