How regulatory clash over airtime credit could hamper investment appeal

The ongoing regulatory dispute between the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) and the telecommunications sector over airtime credit services is imposing a measurable cost on Nigeria’s investment profile. This assessment was shared by a financial analyst and a legal commentator during a public X Space discussion on Saturday, one day before a Federal High Court is expected to deliver judgment in the case.

 

​Kalu Aja, a financial inclusion and capital markets commentator, hosted the session alongside Ilemona Onoja, a UK-based lawyer and public policy analyst. The discussion analysed the economic consequences of overlapping regulatory mandates in Nigeria, using the FCCPC’s application of its Digital Money Lenders (DML) Regulations to airtime and data credit services as the central case study.

​Impact on sovereign borrowing costs

​Aja argued that such regulatory uncertainty is already priced into Nigeria’s sovereign borrowing costs. He noted that while Nigeria has never defaulted on its external obligations since independence in 1960, it pays a higher risk premium on Eurobond issues than countries that have defaulted, including Ghana and Ethiopia. “Togo pays less than Nigeria to borrow,” Aja told listeners, arguing that the premium reflects institutional unpredictability rather than fiscal performance. “The markets do not like uncertainty. You do not have to be richer, but you have to be more certain.”

Read also: Sierra Leone positions for historic 3rd UN Tourism Africa Gastronomy Forum at CAF in Seychelles

​He drew a direct line from the current dispute to the broader pattern of regulatory overlap that increases the cost of doing business. When two agencies claim authority over the same activity, Aja argued, the cost is borne by consumers and the uncertainty deters the equity investment Nigeria needs. “Everybody is giving Nigeria debt, but nobody wants to give Nigeria equity,” he said. “Equity means I trust you. Debt means you have to pay me back.”

 

​Legal boundaries and court orders

​Onoja provided the legal framework for the economic argument. He explained that the FCCPC’s consumer protection mandate does not extend to licensing operators in regulated sectors, a power reserved to the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) under its establishment act.

 

​He noted that the Wireless Application Service Providers Association of Nigeria (WASPAN) secured an interim injunction from a Federal High Court in Lagos in April 2026, restraining the FCCPC from enforcing the regulations. However, the Commission continued to license new operators under the same framework for more than five weeks, until the court issued a Form 45 notice warning Executive Vice Chairman Tunji Bello of possible imprisonment and commenced committal proceedings for contempt.

 

​”When a government agency does not respect orders of court, the signal it sends is: why should I bring my money? Why should I invest in your country?” Onoja said. He stressed that the judiciary had functioned effectively in the dispute, with a judgment expected on Monday, and urged Nigerian agencies to “stick to their lanes” and respect the boundaries of their enabling legislation.

 

​Structural failures and market scale

​Both speakers identified the lack of a mandatory regulatory impact assessment as the structural failure that allowed the dispute to escalate. Aja compared the concept to a data room in capital markets transactions, where all regulatory requirements are consolidated before the process begins. Onoja argued that if the FCCPC had been required to consult the NCC and assess the downstream impact on consumers before enforcement, the jurisdictional collision could have been resolved without litigation.

​The airtime and data credit market, estimated by the industry body, ALTON, to be between ₦300 billion and ₦400 billion annually, serves approximately 40 million Nigerians, predominantly in the informal economy.