According to a charge sheet, FHC/ABJ/CR/197/2025, the commission alleges that the accused wilfully failed to appear before it on March 6, 2025, following an official summons issued on February 25. 

The document lists John Ugbe, Gozie Onumonu, Adewunmi Ogunsanya, and five other directors as defendants.

This follows the Federal High Court’s dismissal of a suit filed by MultiChoice on May 8, which sought legal backing for its controversial price hike on DStv and GOtv subscriptions. Justice James Omotosho ruled that the suit was “an abuse of court process”.

The FCCPC claims that the accused deliberately failed to submit documents relevant to its probe, a breach of section 3 of the FCCPC Act 2018. 

The charge sheet states: “Being Directors of MultiChoice Nigeria Limited on or about the 6th day of March, 2025, at 23 Jimmy Carter Street, Asokoro, Abuja, within the jurisdiction of this Court, [they] caused the aforesaid MultiChoice Nigeria Limited to fail to produce documents which the Company was required to produce, in compliance with a lawful summons issued and dated 25 February, 2025, and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 3 of the FCCPC Act 2018.”

Beyond failing to appear, the commission says MultiChoice’s leadership actively hindered its investigation by refusing to disclose requested documents, an act the FCCPC considers a direct challenge to its regulatory authority.

When the matter came up in court on Tuesday, the Commission’s lawyer informed Justice Omotosho that while the company had been served, the individual directors named in the charge had not yet received personal service. Justice Omotosho subsequently adjourned the case until October 7, 2025, for arraignment.

This issue is rooted in FCCPC’s concerns over repeated and unexplained price increases by MultiChoice. In February, the Commission summoned Ugbe to explain what it described as “frequent price hikes, potential abuse of market dominance, and anti-competitive practices.” It warned that failure to provide clear justification could trigger regulatory sanctions.

MultiChoice objected, filing a case through its legal team led by Onigbanjo SAN. The company argued it had not been given a fair hearing and sought to block the Commission from taking further action, citing a letter dated March 3, 2025. The court, however, dismissed the suit, stating that it was an attempt to stall accountability.

The post FCCPC Slams Charges on MultiChoice Nigeria, CEO John Ugbe appeared first on Tech | Business | Economy.

The ruling, delivered by Justice James Omotosho on Wednesday, came in response to an ex parte motion filed by MultiChoice’s legal team, led by Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Moyosore J. Onibanjo. 

The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/379/2025, challenges the FCCPC’s authority to interfere in the company’s pricing decisions.

MultiChoice had notified its customers of a price adjustment, effective March 1, 2025, affecting various DStv and GOtv packages. The changes included:

• DStv Compact: Increased from ₦15,700 to ₦19,000 (25% rise)
• Compact Plus: Increased from ₦25,000 to ₦30,000 (20% rise)
• DStv Premium: Rose from ₦37,000 to ₦44,500 (20% rise)
• GOtv Supa Plus: Increased from ₦15,700 to ₦16,800

The FCCPC, concerned about possible abuse of market monopoly and anti-competitive behaviour, had summoned MultiChoice Nigeria for an investigative hearing on February 27, 2025. 

The Commission warned that failure to justify the price hikes could result in regulatory sanctions.

However, MultiChoice challenged this directive, arguing that Nigeria operates a free-market economy where companies set their prices without government intervention. 

The company claimed that its subscription rates in Nigeria remain the lowest among all the countries where it operates.

“For instance, the cost of the Premium package in Nigeria is equivalent to $29.81, while the same package costs $85.11 in Kenya,” stated Gozie Onumonu, head of Regulatory Affairs and Government Relations at MultiChoice, in an affidavit submitted to the court.

During Wednesday’s hearing, Onibanjo urged the court to grant an interim injunction to prevent the FCCPC from taking punitive action against MultiChoice while the case is pending. 

He also pointed out that the Commission had continued to issue statements on the matter despite the ongoing litigation.

After reviewing the submissions, Justice Omotosho granted the restraining order and scheduled an accelerated hearing for March 27, 2025.

The ruling effectively stops the FCCPC from enforcing any sanctions or directives against MultiChoice until the court delivers a final judgment on the matter.

The post Court Blocks FCCPC from Sanctioning MultiChoice Over Subscription Price Hike appeared first on Tech | Business | Economy.