Airtime: WASPAN Faults FCCPC’s Account Of Court Judgment, Accuses Commission Of Selective Interpretation

0

LAGOS – The Wireless Application Service Providers Association of Nigeria (WASPAN) has faulted the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission’s (FCCPC) account of the Federal High Court judgment in its suit challenging aspects of the Digital, Electronic, Online or Non-Traditional Consumer Lending Regulations 2025 (DEON Regulations), accusing the Commission of presenting a selective interpretation of the ruling.

In a statement issued on Monday following the judgment delivered by Justice A. L. Allagoa of the Federal High Court, Lagos, WASPAN said while it respected the court’s decision, it considered it necessary to present what it described as “the full and accurate picture” of the judgment.

The association said: “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.”

WASPAN acknowledged that the court upheld the validity of the DEON Regulations and dismissed its originating summons, but argued that the judgment also contained a significant finding that the FCCPC failed to highlight.

According to the association, “the Court expressly held that the FCCPC does NOT have the power to issue licences.”

It added that the court confirmed that while the FCCPC has statutory authority over competition and consumer protection matters, the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) remains the sole regulator responsible for licensing companies in the telecommunications sector.

“This is a finding of considerable importance. It directly validates one of WASPAN’s core positions throughout this dispute: that the FCCPC was overreaching the boundaries of its mandate, and that the NCC is and remains our primary regulator. The Court has affirmed that boundary,” the statement said.

WASPAN maintained that although the judgment dismissed its substantive claims, it clearly limited the FCCPC’s authority, saying the Commission “may enforce the DEON Regulations in so far as they relate to consumer protection” but “may not, under the cover of those Regulations or any other instrument, constitute itself as a licensing body for the telecommunications sector.”

The association also disclosed that it was reviewing the judgment with its legal team, led by Kemi Pinheiro (SAN), to determine its next line of action.

WASPAN further took issue with the FCCPC’s claim that it had fully complied with the court’s interim injunction issued in April 2026, describing the Commission’s account as “a partial and misleading account.”

“The historical record shows that the FCCPC publicly described WASPAN and its members as a ‘desperate cartel’ just two days after the Court issued that injunction – language that was wholly inappropriate for a public institution that had just been restrained by a court of competent jurisdiction,” the association said.

It added that it had previously raised concerns over the Commission’s conduct and the possibility of contempt proceedings, insisting that “public institutions must demonstrate respect for judicial authority not only when judgments go in their favour, but equally when they do not.”

Reaffirming its commitment to the rule of law, WASPAN said it approached the litigation not 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.”