News
WASPAN Appeals Ruling Upholding FCCPC’s DEON Regulations, Seeks NCC’s Exclusive Telecom Oversight
Wireless Application Service Providers Association of Nigeria (WASPAN) has appealed the Federal High Court judgement that upheld key aspects of the regulatory powers of Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) over the digital consumer lending market.
WASPAN urged the Court of Appeal to set aside the decision and declare the commission’s Digital Economy and Online Non-Interest (DEON) Consumer Lending Regulations inapplicable to telecommunications operators.
In a Notice of Appeal dated July 21, 2026, the association, through its lead counsel, Oluwakemi Pinheiro, SAN, challenged the July 20, 2026 judgement delivered by Justice Ambrose Lewis-Allagoa, describing it as legally flawed and internally inconsistent.
WASPAN raised nine grounds of appeal, arguing that the trial court misinterpreted key provisions of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act (FCCPA), 2018, and failed to give effect to the sector-specific regulatory powers vested exclusively in the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) under the Nigerian Communications Act, 2003.
The appeal followed the dismissal of WASPAN’s originating summons challenging the validity of FCCPC’s DEON Consumer Lending Regulations.
Although the trial court held that FCCPC lacked licensing powers and could not assume NCC’s regulatory functions in the telecommunications industry, it, nevertheless, upheld the DEON regulations and dismissed the suit.
WASPAN argued that those findings were irreconcilable with the court’s final decision.
The association contended that the lower court erred in interpreting Section 2(1) of FCCPA as conferring economy-wide jurisdiction on FCCPC without giving effect to the qualifying phrase, “as may be indicated otherwise.”
According to WASPAN, that provision limits the commission’s authority where another law has vested regulatory powers in a sector-specific regulator.
It argued that Section 90 of the Nigerian Communications Act expressly granted NCC exclusive responsibility for promoting fair competition and protecting consumers in the telecommunications sector, thereby excluding FCCPC from exercising overlapping regulatory authority.
WASPAN also challenged the trial court’s interpretation of Section 163 of FCCPA, insisting that the provision does not grant FCCPC unrestricted powers to make regulations across all commercial sectors.
Rather, it maintained that the commission’s regulation-making authority was confined to matters expressly provided for under the Act and could not be extended to regulate telecommunications operators through the DEON Consumer Lending Regulations.
The association further argued that Paragraph 7 of the DEON regulations unlawfully required its members to obtain FCCPC’s approval before providing consumer lending services.
It maintained that the approval requirement effectively amounted to a licensing regime, despite the trial court’s finding that FCCPC had no statutory licensing powers.
WASPAN urged the Court of Appeal to declare the provision ultra vires, null and void.
In another ground of appeal, WASPAN faulted the trial court’s reliance on Section 104 of FCCPA to hold that the Act prevailed over the Nigerian Communications Act.
It argued that settled principles of statutory interpretation required a sector-specific statute to prevail over a general law where both regulate the same subject matter, maintaining that the Nigerian Communications Act remains the principal legislation governing competition, consumer protection, and licensing in the telecommunications industry.
The association also submitted that FCCPC exceeded the powers conferred on it by extending its regulatory authority beyond competition and consumer protection into areas reserved exclusively for NCC.
It further argued that the lower court failed to properly consider the statutory limits of FCCPC’s powers before resolving all the questions in the originating summons against it.
\
WASPAN equally raised constitutional issues, contending that the DEON regulations infringe the freedom of association guaranteed under Section 40 of the constitution by restricting its members’ ability to engage, select, and collaborate with intermediaries and service providers for service activation.
It argued that such constitutional rights could not be curtailed through subsidiary legislation.
The association sought an order allowing the appeal, setting aside Lewis-Allagoa’s judgement of July 20, 2026, and granting all the reliefs sought in its originating summons filed on April 14, 2026.
The appeal is expected to further define the scope of FCCPC’s economy-wide regulatory powers and clarify the relationship between the commission and sector-specific regulators, particularly NCC, in regulating Nigeria’s rapidly expanding digital lending and telecommunications sectors.
Related
