Bennett Oghifo
The Wireless Application Service Providers Association of Nigeria (WASPAN) has called on the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) to fully comply with subsisting court orders and desist from what it described as attempts to misrepresent the ongoing litigation surrounding the Digital Economy Operations Network (DEON) Consumer Lending Regulations 2025.
In a statement issued by its Chairman, Regulatory and Partnership, Osa Umweni, WASPAN expressed concern over reports published in national newspapers on June 6, 2026, which quoted sources within the FCCPC as making claims that allegedly distorted both the parties involved in the court case and the substance of the dispute before the Federal High Court.
According to the association, it became necessary to place the facts on public record in order to correct what it termed misleading narratives surrounding the litigation.
WASPAN clarified that it was the association itself, representing Nigerian value-added service providers, that instituted Suit No. FHC/L/CS/760/2026 before the Federal High Court in Lagos.
The association noted that it is being represented in the matter by Kemi Pinheiro OFR, SAN, LLD, FCIArb., of Pinheiro LP.
The association further recalled that on April 15, 2026, Justice Ambrose Lewis-Allagoa granted four interim injunctions restraining the FCCPC from enforcing or implementing the disputed provisions of the DEON Regulations against WASPAN members.
The court orders, according to WASPAN, also barred the commission from interfering with the services of its members, imposing sanctions for non-compliance, or issuing directives under the regulatory framework pending the determination of the substantive issues before the court.
WASPAN stated that although the FCCPC subsequently applied on April 28 to have the injunction discharged, the court declined the request, thereby leaving the orders in full force and effect.
The association rejected suggestions that the lawsuit was initiated by a foreign entity seeking to frustrate regulatory reforms in Nigeria’s consumer lending sector. It described such claims as false and contrary to the facts before the court.
According to the statement, WASPAN comprises Nigerian-registered companies that hold valid licences issued by the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC), stressing that the litigation was instituted to safeguard the rights and business interests of its members as well as the millions of Nigerians who rely on their services.
“Any suggestion to the contrary is a deliberate misrepresentation of the court record,” the association said.
WASPAN also raised concerns over reports indicating that the FCCPC had increased the number of operators approved under the DEON framework from five to nine firms, despite publicly announcing the suspension of DEON enforcement on May 22, 2026.
The association noted that the commission had itself described the suspension as compliance with the court’s directive, making subsequent actions under the same framework difficult to reconcile with that position.
It argued that the continued granting of commercial rights under a regulatory regime that remains subject to judicial restraint and administrative suspension raises important questions regarding the FCCPC’s commitment to its undertakings before the court and the Nigerian public.
WASPAN maintained that respect for judicial authority is fundamental to the rule of law and urged the commission to demonstrate compliance not only through public declarations but also through its actions.
The association stressed that court orders are binding directives that must be obeyed by all parties, regardless of convenience or institutional interests.
“A court order is not a communications instrument to be acknowledged when convenient and disregarded when inconvenient,” the statement said, adding that public officials are personally accountable for adherence to judicial directives.
Beyond the legal dispute, WASPAN accused the FCCPC of using public platforms to attack and delegitimise industry associations and their members for exercising their constitutional rights to seek judicial protection.
The association insisted that approaching the courts for redress is a constitutionally guaranteed right and should not be portrayed as an attempt to obstruct regulatory reforms or public policy objectives.
It further emphasised that no government agency possesses the authority to punish or stigmatise individuals or organisations for pursuing lawful remedies through the judicial process.
Reaffirming its commitment to collaboration with regulatory institutions, WASPAN said it remains open to constructive engagement with the FCCPC and other stakeholders on issues relating to consumer protection, innovation, and market development.
However, it stressed that such engagement must be conducted within the framework of the law, with due respect for judicial decisions and an unwavering commitment to factual accuracy.
The association concluded that public discourse on the matter should be guided by verifiable facts rather than narratives capable of prejudicing public opinion against parties whose rights are already under judicial protection.
