Connect with us

Business

Refineries spend N5.7tn on foreign oil despite naira-for-crude policy

Published

on

Despite its status as Africa’s largest crude oil producer, Nigeria imported crude oil worth a staggering N5.734tn between January and December 2025 as domestic refineries grappled with persistent feedstock shortages, exposing a deepening supply paradox in the country’s oil sector, The PUNCH reports.

This comes in spite of the Federal Government’s much-publicised naira-for-crude policy designed to prioritise local supply.

Yet, even as the policy sought to channel crude to local refineries, Nigeria produced 530.41 million barrels and earned about N55.5tn from crude oil sales in 2025, highlighting a stark disconnect between robust upstream output and domestic supply shortages.

Data obtained from the National Bureau of Statistics and analysed by our correspondent on Tuesday, showed that the surge represents a dramatic shift from 2024, when no crude imports were recorded, indicating a 100 per cent increase year-on-year.

An analysis of the NBS Foreign Trade in Goods Statistics report revealed that crude oil imports, classified under “Petroleum oils and oils obtained from bituminous minerals, crude”, became one of Nigeria’s major import items in 2025, driven by supply shortages to domestic refineries.

In the first quarter alone, Nigeria imported crude worth N1.19tn, underscoring the urgency with which refinery operators turned to alternative feedstock sources.

The figure rose sharply by about 37.8 per cent to N1.64tn in the second quarter, before climbing further by 46.5 per cent to N2.403tn in the third quarter, reflecting intensifying domestic supply constraints.

However, imports dropped steeply by approximately 79.2 per cent to N499.75bn in the fourth quarter, suggesting a late-year easing in demand or improved local availability, though still indicative of a volatile and inconsistent crude supply environment throughout the year.

Although the NBS report did not name specific refineries, the pattern reflects the broader systemic failure in aligning domestic crude production with local refining demand.

A further breakdown of the figures shows wide monthly fluctuations in crude imports, reflecting unstable supply conditions in the domestic market.

Refineries imported crude worth N335.69bn in January, rising by 32.6 per cent to N445.27bn in February, before declining by 8.5 per cent to N407.29bn in March.

Imports dipped slightly to N335.31bn in April but surged dramatically by 116 per cent to N724.23bn in May, suggesting heightened supply constraints locally.

In June, imports fell by 19.5 per cent to N582.94bn, before spiking to a yearly peak of N1.28tn in July, an increase of about 120 per cent, marking the highest monthly import bill in the year.

This was followed by a 51.8 per cent drop to N619.24bn in August, and further declines to N499.41bn in September and N407.08bn in October.

Imports plunged sharply by 77.2 per cent to N92.67bn in November, before dropping to zero in December, indicating a temporary easing of demand or improved local supply towards year-end.

Overall, the trend underscores a volatile supply environment, with refineries forced to adjust sourcing strategies month by month.

Findings by The PUNCH indicate that local refineries, ranging from modular plants to mega facilities such as the Dangote Refinery, are increasingly turning to international markets due to persistent challenges in sourcing crude domestically.

The refineries cite a combination of structural and commercial factors behind the development.

This was confirmed by the Crude Oil Refinery-owners Association of Nigeria, which noted that refineries turn to imports for survival and increased production capacity.

See also  Impeachment move against Fubara not influenced by Wike – Rivers lawmaker

The CORAN Publicity secretary, Eche Idoko, stated in an interview that domestic refiners within the supply chain have been marginalised.

He confirmed that for several months, no allocation has been received under the Domestic Crude Oil Supply Obligation framework, naira for crude policy or through any other special arrangements.

He said, “Local refiners, especially the modular refineries, have not been getting crude, I mean zero allocation, under the DCSO or any other special arrangement.”

He said the DCSO implementation has been hampered by the ‘willing buyer, willing seller’ policy

Idoko said a modular refinery like Opac couldn’t get crude, and it stopped production for months.

According to Idoko, local refineries have the capacity to produce more than their current output, blaming the lack of enough feedstock for the current output. “We have the capacity to produce far more than what we are producing now. The challenge has always been inadequate feedstock,” he stated.

Idoko stated that some modular refineries like OPAC produce about 10 per cent of their capacities, while some shut down due to a lack of crude oil.

“A good example, the OPAC refinery has a 10,000-barrel capacity. It produces just about 1,000, and it’s not consistent. Sometimes, the refinery is shut down for months because of the unavailability of crude. The Dangote refinery was recently producing at 60 per cent of its total capacity due to the unavailability of feedstock.”

Earlier this month, Dangote Petroleum Refinery & Petrochemicals also cleared the air on the crude oil supply being received from the Nigerian National Petroleum Company under the naira-for-crude arrangement, disclosing that it receives five cargoes of crude monthly which are paid for in naira.

However, it stated that this falls significantly short of the 13 cargoes required each month to meet domestic demand.

The refinery in a statement issued further explained that the shortfall of eight cargoes is being bought from other sources outside the country.

In addition, it stated that the NNPC cargoes are priced at international market rates plus a premium.

As a result, the company said it is compelled to source additional crude from local and international traders, procuring foreign exchange at prevailing open market rates to complete the purchases.

Further investigations revealed that International Oil Companies operating in Nigeria have been reluctant to prioritise domestic crude supply, largely due to better pricing and fewer regulatory constraints in the international market.

Experts say IOCs prefer exporting crude under long-term contracts denominated in dollars, rather than selling locally under conditions that may involve pricing benchmarks, currency risks, or policy uncertainties.

They added that disputes over pricing frameworks, particularly when crude is sold at a premium and third-party influence, have further complicated domestic supply arrangements.

Similarly, an alternative solution provided by the government through the naira-for-crude policy to allow domestic refineries to purchase crude oil in local currency, reduce pressure on foreign exchange, and ensure a steady feedstock supply hasn’t met expectations.

The policy introduced in October 2024 gained prominence with the ramp-up of refining capacity, particularly from the Dangote Refinery, and was expected to mark a turning point in Nigeria’s downstream sector.

Under the arrangement, refiners would pay for crude in naira, while the government would manage foreign exchange implications through the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited.

See also  Court strikes out N12.3bn fraud case against Otudeko after settlement

However, the 2025 import figures suggest that the policy has not fully achieved its core objective.

This situation is driven by several structural challenges, including a mismatch between allocated crude and refinery demand, persistent pricing disagreements over benchmark terms, concerns among upstream producers about naira volatility, and existing forward sales and export commitments that limit the volume of crude available for domestic refining.

The NBS data further showed that Nigeria sourced its imported crude primarily from African countries such as Algeria, Angola while imports from the United States of America accounting for the largest share.

This trend reflects the growing integration of global crude markets, where refiners prioritise reliability and quality over geographic proximity.

Commenting, energy analysts have faulted the implementation of the Federal Government’s naira-for-crude policy, arguing that it has failed to significantly improve domestic crude supply or reduce fuel prices.

The Chief Executive Officer of Petroleumprice.ng, Jeremiah Olatide, said the policy has delivered little impact since its introduction in 2024, as most refineries continue to rely heavily on imported crude.

Speaking in a telephone interview with The PUNCH, he said, “For me, the naira-for-crude policy that was initiated in 2024 has not yielded any reasonable output because the Dangote refinery still sources about 65 to 70 per cent of its feedstock from abroad, while about 95 per cent of modular refineries also source their crude outside the naira-for-crude initiative.

“So, the initiative, for me, is not effective, and that is why we are still seeing a large inflow and importation of crude oil in 2025. In turn, prices at the depot and pump have not been different from when we were fully importing refined products.”

He noted that while the coming on stream of large-scale refining capacity has improved product availability, it has not translated into price relief for consumers.

“The only difference now is that we no longer have supply fears; there is availability of products. But in terms of pricing, I would say the naira-for-crude policy has not translated into lower prices at the depot or pump,” he added.

Jeremiah attributed this to the continued reliance on international pricing benchmarks, even for locally supplied crude.

“Dangote’s crude from the Nigerian National Petroleum Company is still priced internationally and benchmarked to Brent. So it is not as effective as the name implies. The refinery still has to pay based on international prices when converted,” he said.

He argued that to achieve meaningful price stability, the government may need to rethink its approach.

“For me, I feel that the subsidy removal in 2023 should be replaced with another form of subsidy, but this time targeted at refineries. The crude supplied to local refineries should be subsidised. That is the only way prices can be stabilised and Nigerians will feel the impact at the pump,” he stated.

He added that the current arrangement contradicts provisions of the Petroleum Industry Act, which prioritises domestic crude supply.

“The agreement should be revisited. The policy is not effective, and Nigerians are not supposed to be buying fuel at high prices, considering that we have crude and a giant refinery. Local refineries should not struggle to access crude at all,” he said.

See also  Ramaphosa slams xenophobic violence, vows illegal immigrants arrest

Similarly, a Professor of Energy, Dayo Ayoade, said structural issues in Nigeria’s upstream sector have made it difficult for policies like naira-for-crude to succeed in practice.

“We have deeply unreliable supply from NNPC, largely because the company forward-sold crude oil to secure loans for the government in the past,” he said.

“Also, for over 19 years while the Petroleum Industry Bill was being delayed, there was significant underinvestment in the upstream sector. When you combine this with government’s priority of earning foreign exchange and servicing debts, you will see that, in practice, initiatives like naira-for-crude are more on paper than reality.”

He explained that Nigeria’s current production levels are insufficient to meet both export obligations and domestic refining demand.

“NNPC must have crude oil that it can supply, but it doesn’t. By the time international oil companies take their allocations under joint ventures and production sharing contracts, very little is left,” he said.

“Take the 650,000 barrels per day Dangote refinery, for instance. It would require about 650,000 barrels daily to operate at full capacity. That is not feasible at the moment. That crude simply does not exist in available volumes right now.”

Ayoade further noted that crude importation is built into the operational model of modern refineries.

“We also need to understand that the configuration of the refinery requires a blend of different crude grades. Nigeria’s light sweet crude alone is not sufficient, so some level of importation is part of the refinery’s design and business plan,” he said.

On the outlook for 2026, he warned that the trend of crude importation by domestic refineries is likely to persist.

“This pattern will likely will continue in 2026 because issues like logistics bottlenecks, pipeline vandalism, oil theft, and delayed field development cannot be solved in a short time,” he said.

“As long as crude oil accounts for over 95 per cent of our foreign exchange earnings and the government prioritises exports, we will continue to see this pattern for a few more years.”

He added, “That is why I am always cautious when people talk about new refineries coming on stream. The real question is: where will the crude oil come from? That is the fundamental issue.”

Nigeria has long relied on imported refined petroleum products due to inadequate domestic refining capacity. However, recent investments in local refineries were expected to reverse this trend by boosting in-country processing of crude oil.

The Petroleum Industry Act introduced provisions aimed at ensuring a steady supply of crude to domestic refineries, including domestic crude supply obligations.

However, implementation challenges, legacy contractual commitments, and market realities have slowed progress, leaving refiners to navigate supply gaps through imports.

The N5.734tn crude import bill in 2025 now highlights a new phase in Nigeria’s oil sector paradox, where the challenge is no longer just refining capacity, but access to crude itself.

As the country pushes to maximise value from its hydrocarbon resources, the ability to align upstream production with downstream demand will remain critical to achieving true energy independence.

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  Inflation drops to 18.02% in six-month streak

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  Tambuwal fights back over N189bn EFCC probe

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  Marketers fear scarcity as cooking gas hits N1,500/kg

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 returns to Abuja after counterterrorism talks in Rome

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  Gucci owner sells beauty division to L’Oreal for $4.6b

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  Trump threats: Tinubu rallies foreign allies as North rejects Sharia ban

“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