Federal Court Dismisses Contempt Motion Against FCCPC
A Federal High Court in Lagos has dismissed the contempt proceedings initiated by the Wireless Application Service Providers Association of Nigeria (WISPAN) against the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC). This decision follows an announcement from both parties that they have amicably resolved the issues at the heart of the court proceedings.
Resolution of Issues Leads to Withdrawal of Contempt Motion
Judge Ambrose Ruiz-Alagoa officially withdrew the contempt motion after being informed by the attorneys representing the FCCPC that the underlying issues had been settled. This development marked a significant turning point in the case, which previously appeared contentious.
Case Background: WISPAN’s Challenge to FCCPC Regulations
The legal contention centers on WISPAN’s criticism of the FCCPC’s Digital, Electronic, Online, and Non-Traditional Consumer Finance Guidelines 2025 (DEON Regulations). WISPAN argues that these regulations unlawfully extend the Commission’s regulatory reach into areas already managed by other regulatory bodies.
Legal Representation and Initial Proceedings
At the hearing, Kemi Pinheiro SAN led the plaintiff’s team, joined by Chukwudi Enebeli SAN, while Olufunke Aboyade SAN represented the FCCPC. During the initial proceedings, FCCPC attorneys disclosed to the court that constructive dialogue had led to the resolution of the contempt matters, thereby allowing the court to focus on addressing the substantive applications in the case.
Controversies Surrounding Pre-Litigation Procedures
Following the resolution, Mr. Pinheiro formally withdrew the contempt action previously filed by WISPAN and requested the court to nullify the application. The proceedings then shifted towards examining the FCCPC’s preliminary objections concerning the authority to sue.
Mr. Aboyade contended that the DEON regulations have been in effect since July 2025 and questioned the timing of WISPAN’s legal challenge. He emphasized that these regulations were established to safeguard consumers and asserted that WISPAN did not adhere to the statutory pre-suit notification requirements prior to filing their lawsuit.
Arguments Regarding Constitutional Access to Courts
Mr. Pinheiro countered these arguments, claiming that the FCCPC’s position relied on factual assertions lacking sworn evidence. He argued that concerns regarding delays and procedural non-compliance cannot be legitimately raised without supporting documentation. Furthermore, he maintained that constitutional guarantees for public access to the courts take precedence over technical objections related to pre-litigation notifications, especially when imminent regulatory harm is alleged.
Complexities of Regulatory Authority and Legal Consistency
Addressing the case’s substantive issues, WISPAN has requested the court to nullify specific sections of the DEON regulations, arguing that the FCCPC has exceeded its statutory mandate. The association asserted that the Commission is attempting to assert regulatory authority that rightfully belongs to the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) and the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) under current laws. WISPAN further claimed that subsidiary legislation cannot be enacted if it contradicts existing Acts of Parliament.
In response, the FCCPC defended its jurisdiction, stating that its mandate extends to all areas concerning consumer protection. Mr. Aboyade also mentioned that defendants initiating subpoena proceedings have the liberty to introduce independent legal issues in response to claims made in court.
Tensions Continue Over Evidence Credibility
In their final submissions, WISPAN contested the document exhibits presented by the FCCPC, arguing that the materials lacked credibility and failed to establish a clear connection between alleged “usury” activities and WISPAN members. Following a thorough examination of arguments from both parties, Judge Alagoa has adjourned the case until July 20, 2026, when a judgment will be rendered.
