By Deborah Onyofufeke
The Federal competition and consumer protection commission (FCCPC), in its judgement on Tuesday, stated that Multichoice Nigeria has not acted in breach of the rights of consumers by increasing its tariff for Pay TV services and other products.
The three-member tribunal, headed by Thomas Okosun, stated that only the Nigerian President has the power to regulate the prices of goods and services and the Multichoice case is not the kind that the President needs to wade in.
The tribunal added that the Complainants, an Abuja-based lawyer, Festus Onifade and a coalition of Nigeria Consumers, have not proven the extent of damage or losses, the tariff hike had inflicted, noting that, FCCPC, does not engage in price regulation.
The Tribunal, however, ordered the Commission to, in a space of six months, investigate, to find out if Multichoice offers Pay as You Go service in other countries, with a view to seeing how the same can be effected in Nigeria.
It also ordered the DSTV and GOtv company, to make available its audited financial report for 2021 on September 8.
Recall that Festus Onifade and a coalition of Nigerian consumers had dragged Multi-choice, the operators of DStv and GOtv, to the tribunal over its tariff hike on 1 April 2022.
The complainant had prayed to the tribunal for an order to stop Multi-choice from going through with the increment as announced. However, the DSTV and GOtv operators, went ahead to effect the increment.
Onifade, in his amended originating, summons dated June 7, sought the Mandating order for Multi-choice to adopt a pay-as-you-view model in Nigeria.
2023: NASS candidate tasks women on active participation in politics
The legal practitioner argued that “the increment of May 2020 by Multichoice was unlawful and a violation of claimants’ rights as a consumer.
“That the pricing and billing system of the first defendant (MultiChoice) is predatory, preying on the consumers.
“That the contents of the first defendant are recycled materials that do not give the consumers and the claimants value for service.
“That the consumers; should not be made to pay for local television stations at the expiration of their subscription.”
