Connect with us

Business

Monopoly fears rise as Dangote controls N14.4tn petrol market

Published

on

Stakeholders, including energy experts, economists, and Nigerian workers, have raised alarm over the suspension of petrol imports by the Federal Government, urging urgent price regulation as Dangote Petroleum Refinery takes command of Nigeria’s N14.4tn petrol market, signaling a major shake-up in the nation’s energy sector.

On Wednesday, The PUNCH reported that the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority confirmed that it had not issued any import licence for petrol this year, saying that it was no longer needed because local production now meets national requirements.

Data from the NMDPRA, a Federal Government agency, showed that Dangote refinery accounted for about 92 per cent of Nigeria’s daily petrol supply in February, as the regulatory agency stopped the importation of petrol.

Figures released in the February 2026 fact sheet by the NMDPRA showed that local refineries supplied 36.5 million litres per day of petrol in February 2026, while imports contributed just three million litres per day.

This brought the total national daily supply for February to 39.5 million litres, with domestic refining accounting for roughly 92 per cent of the volume, a sharp shift from the long-standing dependence on imported fuel. The data indicates a drastic drop in imports compared with the previous month.

Dangote refinery is the only plant producing petrol currently in Nigeria. Other modular refineries produce diesel. Taking a low-range price of N1,000/litre for petrol, and the total consumption of 39.5 million litres per day in February, it implies that the petrol market in Nigeria is worth over N14.4tn annually. This will however vary from time to time as the global crude price fluctuates.

The confirmation by the NMDPRA that it suspended petrol importation because the country now has enough domestic supply generated diverse reactions from stakeholders on Wednesday.

The NMDPRA warned against the return of petrol imports, as the Minister of Finance, Wale Edun, declared during a live television programme on Wednesday that the government would not tamper with market pricing of petroleum products, stressing that intervention would only be considered as a last resort.

“Rather than now reverting and taking a backward step, we will look at every other measure that can help the cost of living of Nigerians without resorting to non-market pricing,” Edun stated.

An energy expert, Professor Emeritus Wumi Iledare, said the government should allow competitive petrol supply instead of import substitution. While describing that announcement as a significant policy signal, Iledare said it could trigger market speculation and a scramble for market power.

The behaviour, he said, could manifest through precautionary stockholding, opportunistic pricing, or attempts to secure logistical and supply advantages. “The announcement by NMDPRA suspending the issuance of new petrol import licences, on the grounds that local production is sufficient to meet domestic demand, is a significant policy signal in Nigeria’s evolving downstream petroleum market.

“However, such announcements can also trigger market speculation. In a transitioning market structure, participants may interpret regulatory signals differently, leading to strategic positioning and, in some cases, scrabbling for market power. This behaviour can manifest through precautionary stockholding, opportunistic pricing, or attempts to secure logistical and supply advantages,” he said.

The don argued that the data showing reduced imports alongside lower overall PMS supply in February suggested that the market was still searching for equilibrium. “The data showing reduced imports alongside lower overall PMS supply in February suggests that the market is still searching for equilibrium between domestic refining output, inventory management, and distribution capacity.

“For policy effectiveness, regulatory communication must therefore be clear, predictable, and supported by verifiable supply assurance mechanisms. Market confidence improves when participants are certain that domestic production, logistics infrastructure, and pricing frameworks can consistently sustain national demand. Ultimately, the goal should be competitive market stability — not just import substitution,” Iledare submitted.

Also speaking, a professor of energy, Dayo Ayoade, said the NMDPRA is the only agency that knows whether or not the country has enough petrol stock. He said it is the duty of the regulator to ensure the country does not insist on costly importation when there is enough in-country refining. At the same time, he said the NMDPRA has to be careful to ensure the country is not stranded if there is any failure on the part of the Dangote refinery.

“The Petroleum Industry Act is very clear on competition. The Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority, as a regulator, has powers to ensure competition in the downstream sector,” he said.

He added that the heavy dependence on Dangote’s output reflects structural weaknesses in Nigeria’s refining capacity rather than deliberate market control by the refinery. “The fact that they are reliant on Dangote refinery output is because we don’t have functional Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited refineries, and there are no alternatives at the moment,” he said.

According to him, the key responsibility lies with the regulator to ensure transparency in pricing and prevent profiteering. He, however, stressed that the regulator retains the authority to act if the refinery abuses its dominant market position. “But if they find that Dangote is abusing its monopoly privileges, then of course they have the power to penalise the refinery,” he said.

Ayoade added that increased competition would naturally emerge as more refineries come on stream. “The ball is really in the court of the regulator. It has nothing to do with the Dangote refinery. It is not their fault that we haven’t built our refineries to compete with them. As the market matures and other refineries come on stream, we will see more competition, and that will affect pricing,” he said.

The energy law expert also warned that even with multiple refineries in operation, regulators must still guard against anti-competitive behaviour. “Even when we have four refineries working, we still have to keep an eye on competition because they can easily agree and share the market among themselves. So regulation will always remain important,” he added.

Similarly, the Chief Executive Officer of petroleumprice.ng, Jeremiah Olatide, warned that relying on a single refinery for the bulk of Nigeria’s petrol supply could expose the country to major supply shocks. He noted that the production boost by the refinery was artificial and not natural.

See also  CBN targets N2.83tn cash in private hands ahead of 2027 polls

“It is quite great that in two years, Nigeria has achieved over 90 per cent of its petrol consumption produced in the country. But at the same time, we have to be very careful of the energy risks it imposes. A country like Nigeria that is quite fragile, and has a policy that is not properly implemented.”

According to him, the Dangote refinery currently supplies around 50 million litres of petrol daily, accounting for roughly 90 per cent of Nigeria’s estimated consumption. Olatide stressed that competition must be allowed to develop naturally in the market to ensure energy security.

“Relying on the Dangote refinery to supply an average of 50 million litres daily, in tune with 90 per cent of our daily consumption, is a complete energy risk. Competition must be natural. It must be allowed in an economy like Nigeria. We have over 200 million Nigerians who consume around 70 million litres of petroleum products on a daily basis. Any little glitch from the Dangote refinery might pose an energy crisis and even a security crisis for the country,” he warned.

To ensure stability, he proposed a more balanced supply structure that would combine local refining and imports. “For me, a 70:30 balance would be better. 70 per cent locally refined products and 30 per cent importation will give us that balance and energy security.

But 90:10 is too much for an economy like Nigeria that does not yet have very strong institutions to monitor these things. The combination of 70 locally refined products and 30 per cent of importation will give us that balance and energy security,” he said.

Olatide also criticised recent restrictions on petrol import licences, which he said had artificially boosted the Dangote refinery’s market share. While acknowledging the need to support local refining, he argued that restricting imports could distort the market.

According to him, competition combined with access to crude oil in naira for local refiners would naturally lower petrol prices and gradually eliminate the need for imports.

“In the month of February, because of the refusal of NMDPRA to give import licences, the Dangote refinery was able to achieve a lot, and I feel that move is an artificial move. Market forces are supposed to play out. What I mean by this is to allow both parties to compete.

“Though I understand that for us to grow our economy, we must encourage local refining. But giving out only a few import licences in the first quarter is not acceptable. The three million average imports per day shouldn’t be acceptable. It makes up 10 per cent, which is quite dangerous.

“So, for me, I think competition should be allowed to play out and give Dangote access to crude in naira. If this were done, prices would drop and chase out importation. With lower prices alone, importation will die a natural death. But restricting imports through licence withdrawal is an artificial methodology,” he said.

He added that even major economies maintain a level of imports to protect supply security. “Even China recorded above 15 per cent importation recently, and the United States reported about 12 per cent of refined product imports. So, why will Nigeria do just 10 per cent? We should allow the transition to play out gradually instead of jumping from about 40 per cent local supply last year to over 90 per cent in just two months,” he said.

Nigeria has struggled for decades with fuel supply challenges due to the poor performance of its state-owned refineries in Port Harcourt, Warri, and Kaduna, forcing the country to rely heavily on imported petrol.

The commissioning of the 650,000-barrels-per-day Dangote refinery in Lagos has significantly altered the structure of the downstream sector, reducing imports and boosting local refining capacity.

Price regulation

Calls for government price regulation are mounting after the Dangote refinery supplied more than 90 per cent of Nigeria’s petrol market in February, raising concerns about monopoly and consumer protection.

The Nigeria Labour Congress said the dominance of a single supplier in such a critical sector could expose consumers to price exploitation and worsen economic hardship if left unchecked. “The truth is that monopoly is not good for any nation, business, or economy,” NLC Assistant Secretary-General Christopher Onyeka said in an interview.

According to Onyeka, many countries enforce anti-trust regulations to prevent private-sector monopolies, warning that Nigeria risks allowing pricing power to concentrate in one company supplying a product central to economic activity.

The labour leader argued that government intervention has become necessary given the refinery’s growing market share, suggesting temporary price controls as a short-term solution. “In a monopoly situation, the seller fixes the price and determines supply. There is a need to regulate the price of this product at this time,” he said.

He urged authorities to engage the refinery operator to agree on a controlled pricing framework while also reducing taxes and levies on petroleum products to lower pump prices.

Onyeka added that affordable public transportation options should be introduced to cushion workers already facing rising commuting costs, noting that transport fares across major cities have increased sharply alongside fuel prices.

The NLC official claimed Nigeria’s current market structure emerged partly because public refineries remain idle despite claims they are capable of operating, alleging policy decisions had indirectly enabled market concentration.

He also argued that refined petroleum products are still being imported into the country despite claims of domestic supply dominance. “When one man controls a commodity critical to national survival, it becomes prone to abuse,” Onyeka said, warning that monopoly conditions could lead to abnormal profits at the expense of ordinary Nigerians.

As a lasting fix, the labour union called on the government to restore state-owned refineries and support other private refiners entering the market to create competition. “All bottlenecks preventing public refineries from operating must be removed,” he stated, adding that increased competition would help stabilise prices and reduce dependence on a single supplier.

See also  Makinde joins presidential race, warns against one-party state ahead of 2027

The comments come amid broader debate over fuel pricing and market liberalisation following Nigeria’s subsidy removal reforms, which shifted petrol pricing largely to market forces.

An economist, Aliyu Alias, warned that Nigeria risks drifting into a monopoly-driven fuel market that could allow a single supplier to dictate petrol prices if competition is not urgently restored.  “I think we are going to a dangerous corner now. Once there is no competition, monopoly creeps in, and the supplier begins to determine prices,” Alias noted.

He said recent price reductions by the refinery should not be viewed as long-term relief, arguing that dominant market power allows a supplier to adjust prices at will. “You could see that he reduced N100, and people are saluting him. Such moves could mask deeper structural risks in a market lacking alternative suppliers,” he added.

According to him, the absence of operational public refineries and limited participation by other private refiners has weakened competition, leaving consumers exposed to pricing decisions by a single major producer. “If one supplier controls over 90 per cent of the supply, that means he will largely determine the price,” Alias said.

He also warned that market concentration could evolve beyond monopoly into coordinated pricing among suppliers if new entrants align their pricing strategies, creating cartel-like conditions that would be harder for regulators to address.

The economist urged the Federal Government to prioritise restoring domestic refining capacity to create competition and stabilise pricing. “If we have our refineries working, everybody will have to compete,” he said.

Alias stressed that stronger regulatory action from petroleum authorities would be necessary to ensure fair pricing and adequate fuel reserves, noting that several African countries have avoided sharp pump price increases by maintaining buffer stocks. “In Nigeria, once global shocks occur, prices immediately rise because there is not enough stock,” he said.

He warned that without structural reforms, rising global oil prices could continue to translate into higher pump prices for consumers even as government revenues improve. “We are moving into a zone where monopoly and cartel behaviour may flourish, and citizens will bear the cost,” he submitted.

OPS, economists speak

Members of the Organised Private Sector and economists advised the Federal Government to adopt temporary relief measures and expedite the establishment of additional refineries to prevent monopolistic tendencies in the domestic fuel market.

The Chief Executive Officer of Economic Associates, Dr Ayo Teriba, cautioned against making long-term policy decisions, such as price regulations, in response to a short-term global crisis.

He said, “You cannot, because of short-term crises, take a long-term policy decision. Whatever the government wants to do to cushion the shock of a war outbreak that may be over in two weeks or one month should be limited to short-term responses.”

Teriba warned that returning to any form of regulation could lead to price controls or subsidy regimes that could reverse reforms that stabilised the sector after the removal of the petrol subsidy.

The economist recalled that Nigeria “suffered when the subsidy lasted” and that things improved when the President Tinubu administration removed the subsidy. “I am shocked that anybody could suggest bringing price control back because of 11 days of disruption,” he added.

The CEO of Economic Associates added that the government should instead consider temporary interventions that ease the burden on citizens without distorting the market.

“We can announce a ‘US-Israeli-Iranian war relief’ to cushion the shock of that war on energy. No permanent price changes, no permanent policy changes—maybe one month’s relief for targeted Nigerians who need protection against the cost shock,” Teriba suggested.

He also suggested temporary measures to reduce transportation costs, saying, “If the government wants to do something, it can give a 75 per cent discount on train travel or bus travel the way they do during festive periods to ease transportation costs where people feel the pinch of higher fuel prices.”

Similarly, the Director of the Centre for the Promotion of Private Enterprise, Dr Muda Yusuf, rejected the idea of price regulation, warning that it could distort the economy.

He said, “Price control is not the way to go. It can be very arbitrary, and it can cause a lot of distortions in the economy.” Rather, Yusuf urged the government to reduce regulatory charges and costs imposed on refiners and fuel suppliers to ease pricing pressures.

“The best way is for the government to give concessions to those who are either refiners or suppliers or those who are producing the product. The Dangote refinery management recently said they pay about 46 different charges, and all of these things will end up as part of the price that they will charge at the pump,” he said.

He also stressed the need to develop more refineries to ensure competition in the sector.

Members of the OPS, including the National Vice President of the National Association of Small-Scale Industrialists, Segun Kuti-George, affirmed that the current fuel price pressures were driven mainly by global geopolitical tensions rather than by domestic market manipulation.

Kuti-George warned against returning to the era of petrol subsidies, saying, “I am not sure the government should respond by going back to the subsidy era as a result of that. We should not under any guise return to the oil subsidy era.”

He noted that the crisis in the country was external and more likely to be temporary. “It is nothing but the crisis in the Gulf region, the US-Iranian war, which is a temporary thing. That is what has driven up the cost of crude, and it is not Dangote that is responsible for it,” he cautioned.

But the NASSI leader noted that temporary relief measures could help cushion the effects on Nigerians. He suggested that the most important way to prevent Dangote’s dominance in petrol supply is to build more refineries. “The most important thing is that we already have a refinery here in the country. Government should encourage others to build more refineries so that we can have more competition,” he maintained.

See also  Onyema warns new taxes could cripple airlines

NMDPRA rejects petrol imports

Meanwhile, Chief Executive of the NMDPRA, Saidu Mohammed, has warned against attempts to push Nigeria back into an era of heavy petrol importation, saying the country must sustain the gains made in domestic refining.

Mohammed confirmed The PUNCH’s exclusive report that Nigeria did not issue a single licence for the importation of petrol this year, as part of efforts to strengthen local refining capacity.

He made this known on Tuesday while receiving a delegation from PUNCH Nigeria Limited at the agency’s headquarters in Abuja during a courtesy visit aimed at strengthening strategic partnerships between the media organisation and key institutions in the energy sector.

Speaking during the meeting, Mohammed said some interests were still pushing for the continuation of large-scale fuel importation despite the country’s progress in boosting domestic refining capacity.

“Today, we have a refinery that meets our requirements. But there are still people who want us to remain in phase three of importation. I must tell you. So we have to do all we can to make sure that what has been achieved is sustained. That is the hard work and the hard part of our job,” he said.

The NMDPRA boss explained that Nigeria’s petroleum sector has historically passed through different phases, from early domestic refining to the long period of import dependence caused by the collapse of state-owned refineries.

“We have a history of moving through phases. Phase one was very, very good. Most of us were not born then. We understood that there was only one refinery and that the products were being moved by rail. When we grew up, we saw waggons of different colours, and we were told those were petroleum products,” he said.

According to him, the second phase emerged with the establishment of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited and the construction of additional refineries and pipeline infrastructure that improved fuel distribution across the country.

However, he explained that the situation deteriorated when Nigeria’s refineries gradually stopped working, forcing the country into almost total reliance on imported petrol.

“Until we entered the bad phase, phase three, when the refineries went down one by one, and we were faced with this bad phase of importation, almost 100 per cent. It was a bad phase, but good for some businesses. That is how we ended up lining up tank farms between Calabar and Badagry,” Mohammed stated.

He noted that more than 200 tank farms sprang up along Nigeria’s coastline during the period, reflecting the country’s heavy dependence on imported fuel.

“Over 200 tank farms were relying on importation because Nigeria is a very big market, and that created business opportunities for some people. Until the big bang came, which is phase four. Today we have a refinery that meets our requirements,” he said, referring to the Dangote refinery. “But there are still people who want us to remain in phase three. So we must do everything possible to sustain what has been achieved.”

400m barrels release

As the US-Iran crisis disrupted the oil market, the International Energy Agency said on Wednesday its member countries would unlock 400 million barrels of oil from their reserves to ease the impact of the Middle East war, the biggest such release ever.

The coordinated release was the sixth in the history of the organisation, which was created to coordinate responses to major supply disruptions after the 1973 oil crisis.

“IEA countries have unanimously decided to launch the largest-ever release of emergency oil stocks in our agency’s history. IEA countries will be making 400 million barrels of oil available,” IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol told reporters.

“This is a major action aiming to alleviate the immediate impacts of the disruption in markets. But to be clear, the most important thing for a return to stable flows of oil and gas is the resumption of transit through the Strait of Hormuz,” he emphasised.

The IEA-coordinated release exceeded the 182 million barrels of oil that member countries of the Paris-based global energy body released in 2022 when Russian leader Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine.

The 32-member IEA said that the emergency stocks will be made available “over a timeframe that is appropriate to the national circumstances of each member country and will be supplemented by additional emergency measures by some countries”.

The crude market has been hit by wild volatility since the United States and Israel began striking Iran at the end of last month, with Tehran retaliating by attacking targets across the oil-rich Gulf and effectively shutting down the Strait of Hormuz.

The Strait normally carries about 20 per cent of the world’s oil and gas supplies. According to AFP, the IEA announcement came as leaders of the Group of Seven advanced economies discussed the economic fallout from the US-Israeli war with Iran, now into its second week, at a video conference meeting chaired by French President Emmanuel Macron.

Macron, whose country holds the rotating presidency of the G7 advanced economies, urged US President Donald Trump and other G7 leaders to coordinate to open the strait “as soon as possible”.

At the same time, he said that the strait being choked “in no way” justifies lifting the sanctions imposed on Russia over the invasion of Ukraine. “The consensus was that we should not change our position on Russia and should maintain our efforts on Ukraine,” said Macron.

The PUNCH observed that crude oil hovered around $90 per barrel on Wednesday.

Meanwhile, filling stations lowered their pump prices yesterday to reflect the N100 reduction from the petrol gantry price on Tuesday. Petrol sold for prices ranging from N1,130 to N1,150. However, a few filling stations still sold petrol at higher rates.

punch.ng

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

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  Minority investors vital for capital market growth – Sola Oni

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  Dangote Refinery Raises Petrol Price To ₦1,245 Per Litre

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  Crude-for-loans: NNPCL battles N8.07tn outstanding debt

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  Tinubu signs ₦68.32trn 2026 budget, extends 2025 spending deadline

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  Anyanwu expulsion battle: Zonal leaders plot PDP takeover

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  Adeleke’s defection attracting more members to Accord – Chair

“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