More than 40 million Nigerians who rely on airtime lending to stay connected are awaiting Monday’s judgment of the Federal High Court in Lagos in a case expected to determine the future of one of the country’s most widely used telecom value-added services.

 

 

The suit, marked FHC/L/CS/760/2026,  instituted by the Wireless Application Service Providers Association of Nigeria (WASPAN), challenges the legality of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission’s (FCCPC) Demand for Electronic Onboarding (DEON) Consumer Lending Regulations 2025 as they apply to airtime lending services.

 

 

The judgment is expected to resolve months of regulatory uncertainty that saw the suspension of airtime lending across mobile networks before the court intervened with an interim order restoring the service pending the determination of the substantive suit.

 

 

In its originating processes, WASPAN is asking the court to declare that the FCCPC lacks the statutory powers to regulate airtime lending services provided through licensed telecommunications operators and Value Added Service (VAS) providers, arguing that such services fall within the exclusive regulatory jurisdiction of the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC).

 

 

The association is also seeking declarations that the DEON Regulations are unlawful and inapplicable to licensed telecom operators and VAS providers, and is asking the court to restrain the FCCPC permanently from enforcing the regulations against its members.

 

 

In addition, the claimant wants the court to nullify every directive, sanction and enforcement action taken pursuant to the regulations against operators in the telecom ecosystem.

 

 

The legal dispute arose after the FCCPC introduced the DEON framework for digital lending, extending its application to airtime credit services.

 

 

Following the enforcement of the regulations, telecom operators suspended airtime lending services nationwide, disrupting a platform widely used by subscribers, particularly low-income earners, traders, artisans, students and other Nigerians who depend on borrowed airtime to remain connected when cash is unavailable.

 

 

The disruption triggered widespread complaints from consumers before the Federal High Court granted an interim injunction restraining the FCCPC from further enforcement pending the hearing and determination of the suit. Following the order, airtime lending services were restored nationwide.

 

 

The FCCPC has consistently defended the regulations, maintaining that they were introduced to strengthen consumer protection within Nigeria’s digital lending ecosystem by promoting transparency, responsible lending practices and adequate consumer disclosure.

 

 

The commission has also argued publicly that consumer credit products, including airtime credit, fall within its statutory mandate to protect consumers against unfair market practices.

 

 

On its part, the Association of Licensed Telecommunications Operators of Nigeria (ALTON) has repeatedly emphasised the need for regulatory clarity and coordination among government agencies, warning that overlapping regulatory directives create uncertainty for operators and investors.

 

 

Industry players have argued that telecommunications services are already regulated under the Nigerian Communications Act by the NCC, and that introducing additional regulatory requirements without proper harmonisation could disrupt service delivery and investment in the sector.

 

 

Legal and industry observers say Monday’s judgment is likely to clarify the boundaries between the FCCPC’s consumer protection powers and the NCC’s statutory authority over telecommunications services.

 

 

Beyond determining the legality of the DEON regulations, the ruling is also expected to shape the future regulatory framework for digital financial services delivered through telecom networks and provide certainty for operators, investors and the millions of Nigerians who depend on airtime lending as an emergency communication tool.

 

 

With services currently operating only after the court’s interim intervention halted enforcement of the disputed regulations, stakeholders say the judgment is expected to provide long-awaited certainty on whether the existing framework will stand, be set aside, or require a fresh regulatory approach.