Connect with us

Business

NNPCL secures N318bn to fund new oil exploration

Published

on

The Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited has received N318.05bn between January and August 2025 for frontier oil exploration, findings by The PUNCH have shown.

This is according to documents from the September 2025 Federation Account Allocation Committee meeting obtained by The PUNCH.

The deductions represent 30 per cent of Production Sharing Contract profits, which are automatically set aside each month for exploration in inland basins.

The Petroleum Industry Act 2021 created the Frontier Exploration Fund, which mandates that 30 per cent of profits from NNPC’s Production Sharing Contracts be channelled into oil search across under-explored basins, including Anambra, Bida, Dahomey, Sokoto, Chad and Benue.

Regulations also require the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission to manage the fund through an escrow account and issue an annual Frontier Basin Exploration and Development Plan.

Further findings by The PUNCH showed that the NUPRC in July 2025 unveiled a Frontier Basin Exploration and Development Plan detailing proposed seismic surveys, stress-field detection, data integration, and wildcat drilling across basins in Benin Dahomey, Anambra, Bida, Sokoto, Chad, and Benue.

The plan outlined work such as logging and testing of the Eba-1 well in the Dahomey basin, drilling of a new wildcat in Bida, reappraisal of Wadi wells in Chad, and reassignment of Ebeni-1 drilling in Benue.

Signed by the Chief Executive of the NUPRC, Gbenga Komolafe, the document stated that the outcome of these activities would determine further de-risking of assets and exploratory drilling in line with statutory requirements.

Analysis of the FAAC documents by The PUNCH further showed that PSC profits so far this year amounted to N1.06tn, below the budgeted N1.58tn, creating a shortfall of N518.76bn.

Despite this gap, the statutory 30 per cent deduction for frontier exploration was consistently applied, month after month, producing an accumulated N318.05bn by August.

The monthly trend reveals the volatility of the fund. In January, N31.77bn was deducted into the frontier line, when PSC profits came in at N105.91bn.

The February deduction rose to N38.30bn from a profit of N127.67bn, representing a 20.6 per cent increase on the January inflow.

March provided the first big surge, with N61.49bn allocated to frontier exploration from profits of N204.96bn, a jump of 60.5 per cent on February’s figure.

April, however, saw deductions ease back to N36.58bn as profits slid to N121.93bn, a 40.5 per cent drop compared with March.

In May, the fund received N38.8bn, only slightly higher than April’s contribution, reflecting profit of N129.33bn.

June delivered the lowest allocation so far this year, just N6.83bn, after profits collapsed to N22.77bn. That represented an 82.4 per cent fall from May.

The flow recovered somewhat in July, with N25.34bn transferred into the fund from profits of N84.48bn.

In August, the line shot up again to its highest level so far this year. With PSC profit surging to N263.13bn, the fund received N78.94bn, more than three times the July amount and twelve times June’s contribution.

See also  Sahara Group eyes 7,000MW in major power sector push

Across the eight months, the monthly allocations to the frontier fund varied sharply, from as little as N6.83bn in June to as much as N78.94bn in August.

Yet by the end of the period, the automatic deductions had steadily accumulated N318.05bn into NNPCL’s control for exploration in new oil basins.

The same 30 per cent rule also applied to NNPCL’s management fees, which mirrored the frontier deductions exactly.

In January, NNPCL booked N31.77bn; in February, N38.30bn; in March, N61.49bn; in April, N36.58bn; in May, N38.8bn; in June, N6.83bn; in July, N25.34bn; and in August, N78.94bn.

This brought the company’s management fees to N318.05bn in the first eight months of the year.

Based on the figures, the oil firm got a total of N636.1bn for frontier exploration and management fees.

The PUNCH further observed that the Federation Account, entitled to 40 per cent of PSC profits, also experienced the same volatility.

It received N42.364bn in January and N51.067bn in February. March brought N81.985bn, the strongest inflow of the first quarter.

April saw a fall to N48.772bn, followed by N51.730bn in May. June gave the lowest figure of the year at N9.110bn.

In July, receipts rose again to N33.792bn, before climbing steeply to N105.250bn in August, the largest monthly payout so far.

Year-to-date, the Federation Account has received N424.071bn from PSC profits, still well behind the budgeted N631.573bn, leaving a shortfall of N207.502bn.

The FAAC documents confirmed that while PSC profits generated just over N1.06tn this year, the deductions left the Federation Account with significantly less to share among the three tiers of government.

The pressure has been compounded by the non-performance of NNPCL’s interim dividend line.

Budgeted at N271.184bn per month, or N2.169tn year-to-date, the company has not remitted any amount so far, leaving a gaping hole in the federation’s revenue plan.

The issue has prompted closer scrutiny. The FAAC documents record that a special subcommittee was set up to examine the 30 per cent frontier deductions.

The committee met with NNPCL, the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission, and the Central Bank of Nigeria.

At the meeting, NNPCL presented details of exploration activities carried out in all the inland basins from 1999 to date and outlined its intended activities for 2025.

Committee members, however, demanded greater transparency, insisting that NNPCL provide detailed financial records of projects undertaken before and after the Petroleum Industry Act was passed.

The company was directed to submit the information by September 19, 2025, but the documents noted that the assignment was still “work in progress.”

See also  Destabilising Nigeria will empower terrorists, says US lawmaker

The Director-General of the Budget Office of the Federation, Tanimu Yakubu, earlier said Nigeria had lost nearly 60 per cent of its gross oil revenue to deductions under the Petroleum Industry Act 2022, which allocates 30 per cent to the NNPCL as management fees and another 30 per cent to the Frontier Exploration Fund.

He made this statement at a stakeholders’ engagement in Abuja, organised by the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation, to review progress and challenges in implementing the extended 2024 capital budget and the 2025 capital budget under the Bottom-Up Cash Planning Policy.

“Once the Act came into effect without new revenue sources to replace the loss, we lost a sizable part of what used to fund 80 per cent of public expenditure,” Yakubu said.

He added that oil revenues had performed even worse in the first half of 2025 due to low prices and output shortfalls.

Yakubu said he had begun moves in the National Assembly to amend the PIA to recover part of the lost revenue.

During the Federal Executive Council meeting in Abuja last month, President Bola Tinubu directed a review of deductions and revenue retention practices by Nigeria’s major revenue-generating agencies.

The move aims to boost public savings, enhance spending efficiency, and unlock resources for growth.

The agencies include the Federal Inland Revenue Service, the Nigeria Customs Service, the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission, the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency, and the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited.

Tinubu specifically called for a reassessment of NNPC’s 30 per cent management fee and 30 per cent frontier exploration deduction under the Petroleum Industry Act.

He tasked the Economic Management Team, chaired by Edun, to present actionable recommendations to the FEC on the optimal way forward.

The President said the directive was part of efforts to sustain reforms that have dismantled economic distortions, restored policy credibility, enhanced resilience, and bolstered investor confidence.

However, the Petroleum and Natural Gas Senior Staff Association of Nigeria, as well as the Nigeria Union of Petroleum and Natural Gas Workers, rejected the Federal Government’s plans to divest significant stakes in Joint Venture assets managed by the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited.

The two unions warned that the move to allegedly amend the Petroleum Industry Act and remove the running of oil and gas from the NNPCL could endanger the country’s economic stability, weaken its oil industry, and jeopardise the welfare of workers.

They stated that the policies are dangerous and capable of bankrupting the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited.

The oil workers urged President Bola Tinubu to intervene and halt the plan.

Experts seek deductions

Speaking with The PUNCH on Wednesday, the Chief Executive Officer of AHA Strategies, who is an oil and gas expert, Mr Ademola Adigun, has faulted the 30 per cent allocation of Production Sharing Contract profits to frontier oil exploration, describing it as “unrealistic and too high.”

See also  Nigeria spends $10bn annually on food imports, minister laments

Reacting to revelations that NNPCL received N318.05bn for frontier exploration in just eight months without paying dividends to the Federation Account, Adigun said the current arrangement was not justifiable under prevailing economic conditions.

“The money allocation is unrealistic, too high. It is not well used now,” he stated.

He backed President Bola Tinubu’s call for a review of deductions by major revenue agencies, including NNPCL, insisting that more revenue should flow into the Federation Account. “I don’t think it’s worth it to continue this way,” Adigun added.

The industry expert recommended that the frontier allocation be cut drastically, proposing that it should not exceed 10 per cent.

“Maximum of 10 per cent is what I would suggest,” he said.

However, an energy law scholar at the University of Lagos, Professor Dayo Ayoade, has cautioned against a hasty amendment of the Petroleum Industry Act, stressing that the law took nearly two decades of negotiations and compromises before it was passed.

Reacting to the revelations on frontier deductions, he said, “It took us 19 years of reform to agree on the PIA, and the PIA is actually a delicate balance of a lot of compromises. The Frontier Exploration Fund, in many ways, was like a counterbalance to the Host Community Trust Fund.”

While acknowledging Nigeria’s urgent revenue needs, Ayoade insisted that NNPCL must give a detailed account of the money it has collected for frontier exploration.

“It was one of the biggest problems I had with the PIA because I knew that 30 per cent of PSC profits going into just exploration was too high. I would rather that exploration be liberalised and put in the hands of the private sector,” he explained.

He suggested that private investors willing to take the risk of exploring frontier basins should be offered strong tax and operational incentives, instead of government using public funds through NNPCL.

“There should not be any NNPCL spending government money on this project,” Ayoade added.

The scholar also warned that the current funding model posed risks to fiscal federalism and undermined NNPCL’s commercial credibility.

“The funding structure is not really sustainable, and that is the truth. NNPCL is not really a commercial company. All it does is act as a middleman for government and collect money it has not really earned,” he argued, adding that the company should be judged by profits generated from its own fields and operations rather than from joint ventures or production sharing arrangements.

punch.ng

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 *

Business

Abia begins relocation of transport operators to new terminal

Published

on

The Abia State Government has commenced the enforcement of its new centralised transport system in Umuahia, with the phased relocation of transport operators to the Nnenna Otti Bus Terminal, Umuahia.

The Commissioner for Information, Okey Kanu, made this known at Government House, Umuahia, on Tuesday while briefing newsmen on the outcome of this week’s State Executive Council (EXCO) meeting presided over by Governor Alex Otti.

The commissioner disclosed that, in order to ensure compliance by transport operators, the state government took time to hold a series of meetings with transport stakeholders, during which their concerns were addressed.

Kanu added that, following the steps taken by the government, full operations had commenced at the terminal, with informal transport operators and unions already moved to the facility, despite the normal resistance that accompanies change.

“There appears to be some push backs among some of the operators and this is as a result of the fact that people are not easily giving in to change.

“What is happening is that all the parks in the state have been moved to the bus terminal.

“The Honourable Commissioner for Transport and his team have been holding a series of meetings with all the operators. They had one yesterday. And a few of their anxieties will be addressed very soon. Enforcement also will commence today to bring all the operators into the terminal.

“The first phase of operations involves the operations of the Abia Green Shuttle buses. The second phase involves informal transport operators, while the third phase will involve the formal transport operators,” Kanu stated.

See also  Nigeria exports N707bn petrol in three months

Answering questions from newsmen, the Commissioner for Transport, Dr Chimezie Ukaegbu, said the state government had not taken away anybody’s means of livelihood but had instead introduced a more organised system to sanitise the transport sector and improve it.

He revealed that transport unions and operators were told to bring four of their workers each to the terminal, where they would be properly identified with reflective tags and carried along.

He further noted that the terminal operates a transparent system that allocates loading opportunities on a first-come, first-served basis irrespective of union affiliations, insisting that about 80 to 90 per cent of operators had embraced the initiative. He added that continuous engagements were being held with those yet to fully comply with the government’s transport policy.

He equally noted that the government provided a drivers’ lodge, fully air-conditioned and furnished with seats, while passengers sit in a conducive air-conditioned environment, adding, “what else will you need as a transporter or even as a passenger? I think everything good about transportation is embedded in that Nnenna Otti Bus Terminal,” Ukaegbu stated.

Contributing, the Special Adviser to the Governor on Media and Publicity, Mr Ferdinand Ekeoma, said that the centralisation of transport operations would reduce urban congestion, indiscriminate loading bays, expenses incurred by transport operators on their loading bays, and security challenges associated with the influx of unregulated transport operators, thereby enabling transport operators to make more gains.

He added that, over the years, “we have seen transport operators extort people, by coming up with this organised system, we are solving our problems,” Ekeoma stated.

See also  FULL LIST: Nigeria ranked 36th world’s most corrupt country in 2025

punch.ng

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

Business

Court orders Virgin Atlantic to pay N13m for missed flight

Published

on

A Federal High Court in Lagos has ordered Virgin Atlantic Airways Limited to pay Mrs. Joy Ezetah the sum of $5,906.50 in damages after it failed to allow her board a scheduled Lagos-London flight, an incident that disrupted her onward trip to Canada and caused her financial loss.

Justice Ibrahim Kala in the judgement delivered on Monday, held that the airline was liable for the losses suffered by the claimant after she was denied boarding at the Murtala Muhammed International Airport on 6 April 2024.

The claimant had asked the court for N100m in general damages, arguing that she bought a business-class ticket through Air Canada for a four-leg trip from Lagos to Toronto and back, but was stopped from boarding the Virgin Atlantic flight “without justification.”

She told the court that she arrived early, completed check-in, and was issued a boarding pass for the Lagos-London leg.

According to her, airline officials later prevented her from boarding, stating they could not connect her ticket to her Air Canada connecting flight from London to Toronto.

Ezetah stated that the airline owed her a duty of care and should have resolved the issue with Air Canada or made other arrangements instead of denying her boarding.

She further maintained that when she later contacted Air Canada, the airline confirmed that her ticket was valid and that she was expected on the connecting flight.

Virgin Atlantic, however, denied liability. It said it was “not the issuing carrier” and insisted that the ticket had been purchased directly from Air Canada under a codeshare arrangement.

See also  EU Provides N320.5B Credit Line to Boost Nigeria’s Agricultural Sector

The airline also argued that an error code in the reservation system prevented it from issuing a boarding pass for the connecting flight and that it acted professionally by advising the passenger to contact the ticket issuer.

It further contended that the claimant’s inability to complete online check-in before arriving at the airport showed that there was already a problem with the ticket.

After reviewing the evidence, submissions and legal authorities cited by both sides, Justice Kala held that the claimant’s case had merit.

The court awarded $5,906.50 in damages against Virgin Atlantic and ordered that the sum be paid using the prevailing exchange rate published by the Central Bank of Nigeria. Based on the highest official rate of N1,365.50 to a dollar, the award translates to about N8.07m.

Justice Kala also ordered the airline to pay 10 per cent interest per annum on the judgment sum until full liquidation of the debt.

Additionally, the court awarded N5m as costs against Virgin Atlantic, noting that the claimant had been forced to approach the court to enforce her rights.

punch.ng

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

Business

States kick as Senate moves to amend Electricity Act; read details

Published

on

A fresh battle over the control of Nigeria’s electricity sector is brewing, as state electricity regulators have accused the National Assembly of attempting to claw back powers already devolved to states under the Constitution and the Electricity Act 2023.

In a strongly worded memorandum submitted to the Senate Committee on Power and obtained by our correspondent on Tuesday, electricity regulatory commissions and bureaus from 16 states warned that the proposed Electricity Act (Amendment) Bill 2026 could reverse one of the most significant reforms in Nigeria’s power sector.

The regulators argued that the amendment bill, rather than strengthening the electricity market, seeks to restore extensive federal oversight over matters they insist have constitutionally become the responsibility of states.

The concerns were contained in a letter dated May 26, 2026, addressed to the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Power and signed on behalf of the State Electricity Regulatory Commissions and Bureaus.

Signatories to the document included the chairmen and chief executives of electricity regulators in Abia, Anambra, Bayelsa, Edo, Ekiti, Enugu, Gombe, Imo, Kogi, Lagos, Nasarawa, Niger, Ogun, Ondo, Oyo and Plateau states.

The regulators said they had taken advantage of the Electricity Act 2023 to begin building sub-national electricity markets and had already engaged investors based on the framework created by the law.

They noted that they had earlier met with the Senate committee and were subsequently requested to consolidate their concerns into a single memorandum for the consideration of lawmakers, the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission and other stakeholders.

The letter stated, “We represent State Regulatory Commissions/Bureaus that have taken advantage of the Electricity Act 2023 to commence the development of our sub-national electricity markets and sectors.

We are grateful for the audience you granted us to raise concerns on the ongoing consideration of the proposed Amendment Bill 2026 to the Electricity Act 2023.

“As agreed during our discussion, we have collated and consolidated the comments into one document which is hereby attached for the consideration of the Senate and House Committees on Power, NERC and other stakeholders.”

The state electricity regulators said they had identified 17 contentious provisions in the proposed amendments to the Electricity Act that they believed could undermine the constitutional powers already granted to states in the electricity sector.

According to the regulators, the areas of disagreement include the authorisation of State Houses of Assembly to legislate on electricity matters, the supremacy of state laws within state electricity markets, and provisions seeking to retain federal control over all activities connected to the national grid.

Other disputed clauses relate to restrictions on states’ participation in the wholesale electricity market, matters concerning the Nigerian Wholesale Electricity Market, the authority of states over independent transmission and distribution networks, and the establishment and administration of the Power Consumers Assistance Fund.

The regulators also raised concerns over the proposed expansion of the powers of the Nigerian Electricity Management Services Agency, the structure and decisions of the Forum of Electricity Regulators, and the provision granting the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission final administrative appellate jurisdiction on certain issues arising within the forum.

See also  Nigeria spends $10bn annually on food imports, minister laments

They further opposed provisions designating electricity generation, transmission, distribution and supply as essential services, as well as clauses dealing with government-owned enterprises as licensees and obligations to host communities.

Additional areas of contention include the regulation of intra-state electricity matters that may have implications for the national grid, the imposition of timelines and phased conditions for states transitioning into independent electricity markets, and proposed federal oversight on consumer protection, anti-trust measures and tariff design within state electricity jurisdictions.

The regulators argued that the disputed provisions require further consultation to ensure that the decentralisation objectives of the Electricity Act are not weakened by subsequent amendments.

“A review of the Bill suggests that the general intention is to reverse the devolution of legislative, governance and regulatory powers over electricity matters that occur solely within the respective states to the state governments, in favour of a reconsolidation of powers at the federal level, with the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission retaining full supervisory powers over the market. Effectively, it appears that the intention of the Bill is that Nigeria should continue with the same regime that, for 20 years, has not led to any significant increase in power availability or per capita consumption for Nigerians, despite ever-increasing (and unsustainable) federal debt.”

At the centre of the dispute is the interpretation of the constitutional amendments that allowed states to legislate on electricity matters within their territories. The regulators argued that the proposed amendment bill wrongly assumes that state legislatures derive their powers from the National Assembly rather than directly from the Constitution.

According to them, any attempt by the National Assembly to grant, restrict or redefine those powers through ordinary legislation would amount to a constitutional violation.

The memorandum stated, “Section 2 of the Bill aims to amend Section 2(2)(a)-(e) of the Principal Act. By that section, the National Assembly reserves to itself the power to delegate legislative powers to States’ Houses of Assembly, suggesting that the Bill (or the Principal Act) is the source of the powers of a state to make laws on its electricity markets.

“This provision is based on a shocking miscomprehension of Nigerian constitutional law—it proceeds from the wrong assumption that the NASS, by ordinary legislation and not constitutional amendment, can confer (or restrict) the legislative power of states.

“The constitutional division of powers is fundamental to federalism, ensuring a balance between national unity and state autonomy. There is no legal framework for the NASS to ‘empower’ state governments to make law by ordinary legislation, as the language of the Bill attempts to do.

“The constitutional division of powers is fundamental to federalism, ensuring a balance between national unity and state autonomy. There is no legal framework for the NASS to ‘empower’ state governments to make law by ordinary legislation, as the language of the Bill attempts to do. Consequently, Section 2 of the Bill, seeking to amend Section 2 of the Act, is not consistent with the Constitution.”

See also  Tax law: N5tn VAT windfall for states as new formula begins

The regulators described as “a shocking miscomprehension of Nigerian constitutional law” the provisions of the bill that appear to suggest that the National Assembly is the source of states’ authority over electricity matters.

They warned that the proposed law could undermine the principle of federalism by weakening state autonomy. Beyond constitutional concerns, the regulators said the bill could create uncertainty in the electricity market and discourage investors who had already committed resources based on the existing legal framework.

“The clear intention behind the new drafting is to reconsolidate in the Federal Government matters solely within the state electricity markets which had been devolved to the states,” the memorandum stated.

“This will defeat the key objectives of the Electricity Act and the various states’ electricity laws, even before the regime introduced by them has taken any root. It will introduce avoidable disruption in the industry as significant investment decisions have already been taken based on the Electricity Act 2023, and these investments are now put at risk by this proposed amendment.”

The state regulators specifically faulted provisions relating to federal oversight of activities connected to the national grid, restrictions on state authority over wholesale electricity transactions, the proposed expansion of NERC’s powers and changes affecting mini-grids and independent distribution systems.

They argued that allowing NERC to retain overriding authority over electricity activities merely because they have some connection to the national grid would effectively render state powers meaningless.

The memorandum stated, “What is required, in order to attain the full benefits of the decentralisation of the Nigerian Electricity Supply Industry that is the theme of the Fifth Alteration and provided for in the Principal Act, is proper coordination on transmission matters between NERC and state regulators, and not top-down federal legislation.”

The regulators also rejected provisions that would permit NERC to exercise final administrative appellate jurisdiction over disputes involving state electricity regulators. According to them, NERC and the SERCs are on equal standing within their respective constitutional spheres of authority.

“NERC and the SERCs are on equal standing within their respective constitutional spheres of authority,” the memorandum said. “The National Assembly cannot arrogate to NERC quasi-judicial authority over SERCs, especially where the dispute might be on a matter over which NERC has no authority.”

They further argued that the Constitution already vests judicial powers in the courts and that such responsibilities cannot be transferred to a regulatory agency. The proposed establishment of a Forum of Electricity Regulators also drew criticism.

Although the regulators acknowledged the importance of coordination among electricity regulators, they argued that participation in such arrangements should be voluntary rather than imposed through federal legislation.

See also  Nigeria exports N707bn petrol in three months

“The better approach would be a Memorandum of Understanding or similar instrument jointly negotiated by all relevant regulatory bodies in which the principles of coordination and harmonisation will be agreed,” they said.

The state regulators equally opposed provisions declaring generation, transmission, distribution and supply of electricity as essential services covering both federal and state electricity markets.

According to them, such provisions could inadvertently expand NERC’s jurisdiction into areas already devolved to states, including tariff regulation. “The provision is invidious, regressive and should be expunged,” the memorandum stated.

The regulators also faulted proposals empowering NERC to determine contributions to the Power Consumers Assistance Fund from electricity consumers. They argued that since electricity tariffs and retail supply have become matters for state regulation, decisions relating to subsidies and customer contributions should similarly reside with state authorities.

Other contentious areas identified by the regulators included host community obligations, the role of the Nigerian Electricity Management Services Agency, licensing arrangements involving government-owned electricity enterprises and timelines for states transitioning into independent electricity markets.

The dispute highlights the growing tension between the Federal Government and states over the future structure of Nigeria’s electricity industry. The Electricity Act 2023 was enacted following the Fifth Alteration to the 1999 Constitution, which removed electricity from the Exclusive Legislative List and empowered states to generate, transmit and distribute electricity within their territories.

Since then, several states have enacted electricity laws and established regulatory agencies to oversee emerging sub-national electricity markets. Lagos, Enugu, Ekiti, Ondo, Edo and other states have already commenced varying stages of implementation of their electricity reform programmes.

Energy experts have repeatedly described the decentralisation of the sector as a major opportunity to attract investment, improve efficiency and expand access to electricity. However, the latest amendment proposals appear to have reopened the debate over how regulatory powers should be shared between Abuja and the states.

As the National Assembly continues deliberations on the amendment bill, the position adopted by lawmakers could shape the future direction of Nigeria’s electricity reforms and determine whether the country deepens its experiment with decentralisation or returns to a more centralised regulatory model.

The Electricity Act 2023 was designed to operationalise the constitutional amendments that empowered states to participate directly in electricity generation, transmission and distribution within their boundaries. Since its enactment, several states have passed their own electricity laws and established regulatory commissions.

The proposed Electricity Act (Amendment) Bill 2026 seeks to amend several provisions of the principal legislation. However, state regulators contend that some of the proposed changes amount to an attempt to reverse the gains of decentralisation and restore broad federal control over the Nigerian Electricity Supply Industry.

punch.ng

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

Trending