FCCPC Withdraws Case Against MultiChoice Executives

The Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) has withdrawn the criminal case it filed against MultiChoice Nigeria Limited and its senior executives after both parties reached an agreement to settle their differences outside court. The decision ends months of regulatory confrontation between the pay-TV operator and the consumer protection agency over issues related to market practices and price adjustments.

At the resumed hearing before Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja on Tuesday, counsel to the FCCPC, Daniel Amadi, informed the court that the commission had filed a notice of withdrawal dated August 16. He explained that the case was being discontinued because the commission and the defendants had resolved the issues that led to the legal action.

According to him, “The matter is for hearing, but we have filed a notice of withdrawal on August 16. Parties have settled and we agree to withdraw this suit.” Counsel for the defence, Rolake Akingbola, did not oppose the application, and the court subsequently struck out the charge.

Justice Omotosho had earlier scheduled the session for the arraignment of MultiChoice and some of its top officials following a series of allegations by the FCCPC over breaches of the 2018 competition and consumer protection law.

Case stemmed from investigation into pay-TV pricing practices

The criminal case was part of the commission’s broader investigation into how MultiChoice operates in Nigeria’s pay-TV market. The FCCPC had accused the company of failing to honour a lawful summons issued in February 2025 and of obstructing its investigation into pricing and market practices.

The charge, marked FHC/ABJ/CR/197/2025, contained seven counts against the company and several of its executives. Among those listed were the chairman, Adewunmi Ogunsanya; the managing director and chief executive officer, John Ugbe; and other senior officers including Fhulufhelo Badugela, chief executive of MultiChoice Africa Holdings; Retiel Tromp, chief financial officer for Africa; and Keabetswe Modimoeng, group executive for corporate affairs.

Others named in the case were a director, Adebusola Bello; Fuad Ogunsanya; and Gozie Onumonu, head of regulatory affairs and government relations.

In one of the charges, the company was alleged to have failed to appear before the commission on March 6, despite a summons issued on February 25. The FCCPC described this as an offence contrary to Section 33(3) of its establishing Act. Another charge accused the executives of impeding the investigation by refusing to produce requested documents, in violation of Section 110 of the same law.

The dispute followed an earlier decision by MultiChoice to review its subscription prices in March. The company, which operates DStv and GOtv, had announced an upward adjustment of its packages, prompting public criticism and regulatory attention. The FCCPC invited the company to explain the reasons for the price changes and to provide information on how the new rates aligned with market fairness and consumer protection standards.

However, instead of complying fully with the summons, MultiChoice filed a separate suit at the Federal High Court seeking to restrain the commission from taking administrative action against it. The company argued that the FCCPC’s investigation was unnecessary since a similar matter was already before the court in another case filed by a legal practitioner, Festus Onifade.

Justice Omotosho, in a ruling delivered on May 8, dismissed the company’s application and held that it amounted to an abuse of court process. The judge stated that the ongoing regulatory inquiry by the FCCPC was lawful and could proceed.

Settlement marks a pause in FCCPC’s enforcement efforts

Tuesday’s withdrawal of the case marks a pause in the regulator’s enforcement drive against the pay-TV operator. The FCCPC had maintained that it was acting within its mandate to prevent abuse of market dominance and protect consumers from unfair pricing. The commission’s intervention had also drawn public attention to competition issues in Nigeria’s subscription television market, which has long been dominated by MultiChoice.

By opting for settlement, both parties appear to have reached an understanding on how to address the commission’s concerns without prolonging the court dispute. The details of the settlement were not disclosed in court, but the withdrawal notice indicates that discussions between the company and the regulator had been ongoing since August.

The development brings temporary relief to the executives who were scheduled for arraignment. It also allows MultiChoice to refocus on its operations at a time when the pay-TV industry faces increasing competition from digital streaming platforms and regulatory scrutiny over pricing transparency.

The FCCPC had earlier directed the company’s chief executive to appear for an investigative hearing on February 27. It also issued a warning that failure to justify the price adjustment or adhere to fair market practices could attract sanctions. The regulator’s position was that frequent price increases without adequate explanation undermined consumer confidence and could amount to unfair market behaviour.

Similarly, the commission had expressed concerns about the company’s level of compliance with Nigerian consumer protection standards, including responsiveness to customer complaints and communication of service changes.

The resolution of this dispute could open the door for better cooperation between the regulator and players in the broadcasting and pay-TV sectors. It also highlights the FCCPC’s increasing focus on enforcing competition laws in industries that directly affect consumers.

Consequently, the withdrawal of the case may not mean the end of regulatory oversight on MultiChoice’s operations. The FCCPC has the authority to continue monitoring compliance with fair market practices and can reopen investigations if fresh evidence arises.

In the same vein, the case underscores the growing assertiveness of consumer protection agencies in Nigeria’s corporate environment. Over the past year, the FCCPC has intensified efforts to ensure that large companies, especially those in essential service sectors, comply with established standards of fairness, transparency, and accountability.

For MultiChoice, the outcome reinforces the need to maintain open channels of communication with regulators while balancing business realities with consumer expectations.

As the industry continues to evolve, regulatory attention on pricing, competition, and customer welfare is expected to remain strong. The settlement, therefore, represents a momentary truce in what could remain a complex relationship between regulators and service providers in Nigeria’s media and entertainment landscape.