Connect with us

News

Tariff war; FG intervenes as states, Discos’ rift deepens

Published

on

As s the crisis between states and electricity distribution companies continues to degenerate over who has the power to fix electricity tariffs, the Federal Government, through the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission, has summoned all the stakeholders to a meeting scheduled for next week.

Energy commissioners of state governments, under their umbrella body known as the Forum of Commissioners for Power and Energy in Nigeria, have repeatedly insisted that the Electricity Act, 2023 (Amended), has empowered state governments to regulate their respective power markets.

But power distribution companies, under the aegis of the Association of Nigerian Electricity Distributors, insisted that, although the Act enabled the states to regulate their power markets, the state governments lack the power to put a price on cross-border electricity.

As a result of this, neither the states nor the Discos are ready to shift ground over who has the authority to regulate electricity tariffs. As state regulators make moves to design tariffs for the electricity markets in their domains, starting with Enugu State, power distribution companies declared that this cannot work.

The tariff ordered by the Enugu Electricity Regulatory Commission recently also sparked the reactions of power generation companies, including the Niger Delta Power Holding Company, as the Gencos argued that states have no power to dictate the cost of power from the national grid.

To de-escalate the situation, the national regulator, NERC, has invited all the actors involved in the imbroglio to a meeting scheduled to be held next week in Lagos, as the Discos declared again on Thursday that the states should not destroy the power sector with the quest to regulate electricity tariffs.

The General Manager of Public Affairs at NERC, Dr Usman Abba-Arabi, told one of our correspondents in an interview on Thursday that the meeting would discuss the matters and proffer solutions to them.

The NERC spokesman maintained that invitations have been sent to the state regulatory commissions, the distribution companies, and other stakeholders in the Nigerian Electricity Supply Industry.

“The next Nigerian Electricity Supply Industry stakeholders meeting is scheduled for next week in Lagos. State Regulatory Commissions have been invited to attend. The Discos and other industry players will all be in attendance. It’s a forum where industry issues will be discussed and solutions proffered,” he stated.

Abba-Arabi stated that the meeting is purely for the industry and would be done without the attention of the press.

Discos talk tough

The crisis between the Discos and state governments started in July when the Enugu Electricity Regulatory Commission announced that it had slashed the Band A tariff from N209 per kilowatt-hour to N160/kWh, ordering MainPower Electricity Distribution Limited to implement this from August 1, 2025.

As the new tariff regime began on the stated date, MainPower’s energy supplier, the Enugu Electricity Distribution Company, had to cut supply to Enugu by 50 per cent, leaving many customers in darkness. MainPower explained that EEDC had calculated that implementing the tariff cut would lead to monthly losses exceeding N1bn, undermining its obligations to the market.

Reacting to the development during an interview with one of our correspondents on Thursday, the Chief Executive Officer of the Association of Nigerian Electricity Distributors, Sunday Oduntan, warned states and their newly established regulatory agencies not to destroy the power sector.

See also  Fubara - Why I refused to challenge emergency rule

Oduntan, who is also the spokesman of the Discos, argued that what the Enugu Electricity Regulatory Commission was planning would not work, saying it was an attempt to draw back the sector. According to him, the Electricity Act, 2023 (Amended), allows the states to generate, transmit, and distribute electricity within their respective states, but does not give them the power to put a price on cross-border electricity from the national grid.

He said states would only control electricity tariffs when they start generating, transmitting, and distributing the same. He accused the EERC of having plans to regulate the cost of a product that does not belong to the state regulator.

“The Electricity Act, 2023 (Amended), allows the states to generate, transmit, and distribute electricity within their respective states. That is just the summary of that law. It is to enable them to take care of their own electricity issues. Now, what happened in Enugu was that the electricity regulatory commission in the state wanted to control the price of a product that does not belong to them.

“Let me explain what I mean: if they generate electricity in Enugu State, and they transmit and distribute it within Enugu State, they have the right to fix the price. But the law is very clear: they are not in charge of cross-border tariffs. What do I mean by cross-border tariffs? This is a product that has crossed outside the borders of your state, for instance, from the national grid.

“So, you cannot put a price on such a product. That product has a cost of production. That is what they were seeking to do, and they are just shooting themselves in the foot; it is not going to work! You can control your electricity, not the electricity that belongs to another person,” Oduntan insisted.

He warned that the power sector would collapse if electricity was sold below the cost of production. He stressed that if the states failed to listen to other stakeholders on the issue, they would only pull down the sector.

“So, when the regulator in the state says the Disco there should sell at a lower price, the question to be asked is this: ‘Is that price below the cost price?’ If it is below the cost price, then the company will collapse. So, it won’t work. They cannot do it. If they insist, then they will destroy the power sector,” he said.

Oduntan added that Enugu could generate power from coal and transmit and distribute it at no cost to the consumers as palliatives, but not the energy from the grid. “They (Enugu) can generate from coal, transmit and distribute it, and can even give it out as palliatives or free of charge to their residents. But not for energy that comes from outside their borders. That is the point. Cross-border tariffs are not in their hands,” he insisted.

See also  Insecurity: Nigerians urge swift action amid Trump’s threat

States respond

Meanwhile, the Forum of Commissioners for Power and Energy in Nigeria said it is only concerned about issues that could push the power sector forward. The Chairman of FOCPEN and Commissioner of Power and Renewable Energy in Cross River State, Prince Eka Williams, said the forum would not banter words with the Discos, saying, “We are not in a war.”

According to him, the forum is more concerned about the efforts being made to light up every home in Nigeria. He said the forum will work with other stakeholders to proffer solutions to the challenges in the energy sector, saying he would not comment on what Oduntan said.

After complaints of blackouts and vending glitches, MainPower restored power to Enugu residents, but at the old cost. The Disco ignored the new tariff order that slashed the Band A tariff to charge N209/kWh. Electricity customers in the state said they now pay the old rate after power was restored by MainPower.

However, the EERC kicked against this. It accused MainPower of tariff breach while threatening sanctions. In a public notice, the commission stated that it has come to its attention that Mainpower Electricity Distribution Company Limited has reverted to charging its Band A customers N209.50/kWh, as against the commission’s order of 160.40/kWh.

The commission expressed displeasure that “this violation” persists despite prior directives from the commission mandating strict compliance with the tariff order. “Such actions constitute a breach of the Tariff Order by Mainpower Electricity Distribution Limited,” the commission said, urging Band A customers in Enugu State to report overbilling.

“Band A customers who have been billed above the approved rate are urged to report the discrepancy to the commission with evidence of the breach for necessary regulatory action, which may involve imposing appropriate sanctions on MainPower,” the EERC warned.

Recall that NERC had earlier told the Enugu regulator that any state that wanted to slash tariffs should be ready to pay the shortfall. “As states do not have jurisdiction over the national grid and over electric power stations established under federal laws/operating under licences issued by the commission, they must holistically incorporate the wholesale costs of grid supply to their states without any qualification or deviation in their design of tariffs for end-use customers in order not to distort the dynamics of the market or be prepared to make a policy intervention by way of a subsidy for any deviation in the tariff structure that distorts the wholesale generation, transmission and legacy financing costs in the Nigeria Electricity Supply Industry,” NERC said in July.

But Enugu and other states disagreed with claims by NERC that sub-national entities cannot fix electricity tariffs because they do not generate and transmit electricity. The Special Adviser to the Enugu Governor on Power, Joe Aneke, said states have the power to design tariffs as far as distribution is concerned.

Aneke said the new tariff by the Enugu Electricity Regulatory Commission did not tamper with the costs of generation and transmission, saying it based its calculations on distribution only.

See also  Tinubu approved lifetime salary for retiring senior officers – Interior minister

The Forum of Commissioners for Power and Energy in Nigeria said in a statement that NERC does not have overriding regulatory authority over electricity distribution and tariff setting, noting that the fifth constitutional alteration and the 2023 Act give states exclusive jurisdiction over electricity distribution, whether connected to the national grid or not, emphasising the power of states to adjust tariffs.

Aneke clarified that the EERC’s new tariff would not distort the electricity market because it did not affect generation and transmission. “It’s possible to reduce tariffs, and on the other hand, it’s equally possible to increase them, but these are subject to facts, figures, and numbers. Why am I saying so? Recall that the subnationals do not regulate generation. And in this tariff determination, which Enugu did, the cost of generation was not tampered with at all. It still stays as it is because we know we don’t regulate generation, and we don’t regulate transmission. That is the work of NERC. None of those costs were touched.

“So, why is it not possible for state regulatory commissions to fix tariffs, having been given the law, having the power, having the numbers, and having jaw-jawed with the subcos, with their figures on the table? Let me go to the granular. Everybody here appreciates the fact that there are certain variables and costs that are used or considered before tariffs are determined. If these figures are laid bare, you see that some are not realistic, just to avoid using certain words, and some cannot be sustained. The argument of the presentation cannot be sustained,” Aneke said.

Giving an example, he said MainPower claimed a sum of N9bn for recovery, but the figure was not up to that.

“For instance, a lump sum that was presented at about N9bn. When we got into the nitty-gritty, we looked at the facts, the figures, the numbers, the customer numbers, and the so-called lifeline. We have now discovered that what they presented wasn’t correct. They tacitly understood that and accepted it,” he said.

However, MainPower, in a petition to the commission, said the tariff order published on July 18 was not agreed upon by the parties and that the same did not comply with Regulation No. EERC/R004.

The Disco averred that Section 4.1(c) provides that “in order to avoid ‘gold-plating’ in the tariff using rate of return regulation, the licensee shall be required to review costs with the commission. It is the cost agreed with the commission that shall be allowed for the operator to use in the tariff model for the determination of the price that shall apply in contracts.

“This is because the value chain of the electricity business in Enugu State shall be subject to contracts, and prices shall be determined based on the applicable methodology published by the commission on its website. The review process for the cost shall be as prescribed in the Schedules to these Regulations.”

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

TUMBLR

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

TikTok restricts late-night live access for Nigerian users

Published

on

TikTok has temporarily restricted access to its LIVE feature for users in Nigeria during late-night hours, issuing an in-app notice to creators as part of what it described as an ongoing safety investigation.

At midnight Nigerian time on Sunday, the platform sent a system notification to users stating,”LIVE⚫ Notices
TikTok LIVE Update in Nigeria
We’re temporarily limiting LIVE late at night in Nigeria as part of our investigation to ensure our platform remains safe and our community stays protected.”

File Copy: The notification gotten by the app users in Nigeria

Checks by PUNCH Online showed that LIVE sessions, which were active earlier in the night, became inaccessible between 11pm and 5am, with affected accounts displaying a “No Access” label.

The restriction also prevented creators from viewing LIVE broadcasts from other countries.

Only creators with at least 1,000 followers, the minimum requirement to host a LIVE session, received the notification.

Several confirmed that all LIVE activities had been halted overnight.

Despite the disruption, creators who earn through LIVE gifting have their balances and previous earnings intact, easing concerns of financial loss.

As of Monday morning, LIVE access had been restored, sparking discussions across social media as users speculated about the cause of the sudden, nationwide restriction.

Night-time hours are typically peak periods for Nigerian streamers who host matches, entertainment segments, trends and other interactive sessions that attract viewers and virtual gifts.

The development comes weeks after TikTok released updated safety statistics for West Africa.

During its West Africa Safety Summit in Dakar, Senegal, the company disclosed that in the second quarter of 2025, it took action against 2,321,813 LIVE sessions and 1,040,356 LIVE creators globally for violating its LIVE Monetisation guidelines.

See also  INEC chair: Security check begins, Council of State to meet

In Nigeria alone, 49,512 LIVE sessions were banned within the same period.

TikTok also reported removing 3,780,426 videos in Nigeria between April and June 2025 for breaching Community Guidelines, with 98.7% taken down before being viewed and 91.9% removed within 24 hours.

TikTok Live is an in-app feature letting users broadcast in real-time, fostering direct engagement with viewers through comments and virtual gifts, unlike pre-recorded videos, creating interactive sessions for Q&As, talent showcases, or just chatting.

To go live, you generally need 1,000+ followers (though sometimes less), be at least 16 (18 to earn money), have a clean account, and use the ‘+’ button to select ‘LIVE’, adding a title and effects before starting.

punch.ng

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

TUMBLR

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

News

Nnamdi Kanu acted like Awolowo by disengaging lawyers — Consultant

Published

on

Aloy Ejimakor, legal consultant to the convicted leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra , Nnamdi Kanu, has likened him to the late Premier of the Old Western Region, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, over his decision to represent himself in court.

In a conversation with our correspondent on Sunday, Ejimakor suggested that Kanu’s refusal to hire lawyers may be delaying the filing of his appeal against his life imprisonment by the Federal High Court in Abuja.

“MNK has not filed his appeal yet because he has refused to hire lawyers. You know he disengaged us as his lawyers, so we now act in the capacity of a consultant. I am a consultant to him,” Ejimakor said. “I don’t know why he does not want a lawyer, but I believe it is because he is a great man. Many great men are like that. They believe you can’t present their case like they can themselves. Even Awolowo refused to hire lawyers in his time. MNK wants to represent himself, and there are about four or five processes he has to follow to file the appeal before the Appellate Court.”

Ejimakor also backed Kanu’s request to be tranferred to Abuja from the Sokoto Correctional Centre.

He said, “The court already said he can’t be in Kuje prison, so that is fine, but he needs to be closer to Abuja, so if the court will grant his motion to be transferred to Suleja prison or Keffi. To me, there is nothing special about any prison in Nigeria. They are all the same, but MNK needs to be close to Abuja.”

See also  FRSC, others avert fuel tanker fire in Kogi

During his trial, Kanu opted to represent himself after disengaging his legal team, headed by a former Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Kanu Agabi (SAN).

On November 20, the court found him guilty on all seven terrorism-related charges brought by the Federal Government and sentenced him to life imprisonment.

Following his sentencing, Kanu was moved to the Sokoto correctional Facility due to concerns for his safety at Kuje, where previous prison breaks had been recorded.

He later filed a motion before Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court seeking a transfer from Sokoto to a custodial facility closer to Abuja, such as Suleja or Keffi.

In the motion, personally signed by him, Kanu asked that it be deemed moved in absentia and sought an order compelling the Federal Government or Nigerian Correctional Service to effect the transfer.

Citing eight grounds in the motion marked FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2015, Kanu explained that his detention in Sokoto—over 700 kilometres from Abuja—made it impracticable to prepare his notice of appeal and record of appeal.

He stressed that all persons critical to assisting him, including relatives, associates, and legal consultants, are based in Abuja.

“The applicant’s continued detention in Sokoto renders his constitutional right to appeal impracticable, occasioning exceptional hardship and potentially defeating the said right, in violation of Section 36 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended),” the motion stated.

Kanu argued that transferring him to a facility nearer Abuja would enable him to effectively prosecute his constitutionally guaranteed right of appeal.

Continue Reading

News

U.S. Court Jails Nigerian Fraudster Oluwaseun Adekoya To 20 Years For Impersonation And 2M U.S.Dollars Fraud

Published

on

A U.S. federal court has sentenced Oluwaseun Adekoya, a Nigerian serial fraudster who operated under multiple aliases while running a sprawling nationwide bank-fraud and money-laundering enterprise, to 20 years in prison for masterminding schemes that stole and laundered more than $2 million through a network of impersonators, fake accounts, and coordinated withdrawals across several states.

Adekoya’s arrest and conviction capped years of sophisticated financial crimes that federal investigators say left a trail of victims stretching from New York to multiple U.S. states.

The case broke open after the State Employees Federal Credit Union (SEFCU), headquartered in Albany, New York, detected a pattern of suspicious impersonation transactions across Capital Region branches. SEFCU’s alert triggered a multi-agency federal investigation led by the FBI’s Albany Field Office, which eventually exposed Adekoya as the mastermind of an extensive identity-theft and bank-fraud ring involving at least 13 accomplices.

Investigators said Adekoya consistently reinvented himself with new identities, new roles, and new operational tactics, as he expanded the criminal enterprise. His run ended on December 12, 2023, when FBI agents executed a search warrant at his luxury apartment.

During the raid, Adekoya attempted to remotely wipe the primary cellphone used to coordinate the schemes. Agents nevertheless recovered a trove of incriminating evidence, including:

• Multiple burner phones
• High-end luxury items such as Rolex watches
• A $51,000 Tiffany engagement ring
• Designer handbags
• More than $26,000 sitting in a laundering account

All items have since been forfeited.

Following two superseding indictments that added charges and additional defendants, Adekoya was convicted on multiple fraud and money-laundering counts. He has remained in custody since his arrest.

See also  Nigeria needs new Constitution, not amendments – Ezekwesili

In addition to the 20-year sentence, he will serve five years of supervised release, pay over $2.2 million in restitution, remit a $1,100 special assessment, and faces removal from the United States upon completing his prison term.

Federal prosecutors said the ring relied on coordinated identity theft, impersonation of account holders, and strategic branch-by-branch withdrawals. Accomplices posed as legitimate bank customers, using stolen personal data to siphon funds, which were then laundered through controlled accounts, cash couriers, and luxury purchases.

The ring’s operations were “structured, disciplined, and highly adaptive,” investigators said, changing methods frequently to avoid detection.

Thirteen co-conspirators earlier pleaded guilty to roles ranging from impersonation to cash-movement, account manipulation, and logistical support. Their sentences include:

• David Daniyan, 61 (Brooklyn): 54 months’ imprisonment, one year supervised release, restitution over $2.2m.
• Kani Bassie, 36 (Brooklyn): 11 years’ imprisonment, five years supervised release; restitution pending.
• Davon Hunter, 27 (Richmond): 42 months’ imprisonment, three years supervised release, $469,499.18 restitution.
• Christian Quivers, 20 (Richmond): 42 months’ imprisonment, three years supervised release, $385,650 restitution.
• Jermon Brooks, 20 (Richmond): 36 months’ imprisonment, two years supervised release, $385,650 restitution.
• Akeem Balogun, 56 (Brooklyn): 21 months’ imprisonment, two years supervised release, $262,200 restitution.
• Victor Barriera, 64 (Bronx): Time served, three years supervised release, $203,352 restitution.
• Danielle Cappetti, 46 (Bronx): Time served, three years supervised release, $142,796 restitution.
• Jerjuan Joyner, 50 (Brooklyn): 12 months’ imprisonment, three years supervised release, $135,998 restitution.
• Gaysha Kennedy, 46 (Brooklyn): Time served, two years supervised release, $24,500 restitution.
• Crystal Kurschner, 44 (Brooklyn): Time served, three years supervised release, $220,850 restitution.
• Sherry Ozmore, 56 (Richmond): Time served, three years supervised release, $229,303.18 restitution.
• Lesley Lucchese, 53 (Manhattan): Pleaded guilty and awaits sentencing in 2026.

See also  Former French president Nicolas Sarkozy is freed from prison after three weeks

U.S. prosecutors say the dismantling of Adekoya’s syndicate underscores the increasing sophistication of fraud networks operating across state lines, and the growing cooperation among federal, state, and local law-enforcement agencies to disrupt them.

Officials noted that the investigation required extensive coordination across jurisdictions and financial institutions, describing it as “a model of inter-agency effectiveness.”

Source: Newsmakerslive

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

TUMBLR

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

Trending