The Federal High Court in Lagos, on Wednesday, temporarily stopped the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) from enforcing key provisions of the Digital, Electronic, Online or Non-Traditional Consumer Lending Regulations 2025.
The judge, Ambrose Lewis-Allagoa, granted the interim order following an ex parte application filed by the Wireless Application Service Providers Association of Nigeria (WASPA Nigeria).
|
|
The regulations were put in place in 2025 to curb predatory practices and ensure the stability of Nigeria’s fintech sector.
It mandates that all digital lenders obtain formal licensing, adhere to strict interest rate caps, and implement transparent disclosure protocols for all loan terms.
|
|
|
|---|
Also, the regulations introduce robust data privacy requirements and prohibits unethical debt recovery tactics to protect consumers from harassment and unauthorised data usage.
The regulations are a response to the rise of predatory activities of loan sharks in the Nigerian digital space, including using unethical methods to steal debtors’ data and using the stolen information to blackmail and harass the subjects.
But WASPA Nigeria initiated its legal action to challenge the regulations and FCCPC’s authority to enforce them.
It said theregulatory actions affect its members, many of whom operate within Nigeria’s digital lending and mobile service ecosystem.
Ayo Stuffman, who is a director of a registered and financial member of the association, said in the affidavit accompanying the application filed on 14 April, that FCCPC lacked the statutory authority to regulate aspects of the telecommunications sector affected by the regulations.
Through Mr Stuffman, WASPA Nigeria contended that the disputed provisions of the regulations attempt to impose licensing, compliance and supervisory obligations on its members, many of whom operate within the telecommunications ecosystem.
The association maintained that such powers are already vested in the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) under the Nigerian Communications Act 2003, and that the FCCPC’s actions create a parallel regulatory regime.
WASPA further told the court that several of its members fall within the category of entities targeted by the regulations and are consequently subjected to additional regulatory and compliance requirements.
The association also alleged that the FCCPC had commenced steps to enforce the regulations despite a pre-action notice issued on 10 April.
According to the affidavit, the commission issued directives requiring members to provide written assurances of compliance and to cease activities considered to be in breach of the regulations.
It added that a deadline of 16 April was set for compliance, with threats of sanctions, penalties and fines for failure to comply.
WASPA expressed concern that the enforcement of the regulations could disrupt the operations of its members and expose them to regulatory uncertainty.
The association further argued that unless the court intervenes, the continued enforcement of the regulations could render the substantive suit ineffective.
In the application filed on 14 April, the plaintiff sought several interim orders pending the hearing and determination of its motion for interlocutory injunction.
The court, after reviewing the affidavit evidence and hearing submissions from the lawyer to the applicant, Kemi Pinheiro, who is a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), granted the requests.
Ruling
In his ruling, Mr Lewis-Allagoa restrained the FCCPC, whether acting by itself, its officers, agents, or any other persons, from enforcing or implementing the Digital, Electronic, Online or Non-Traditional Consumer Lending Regulations 2025, particularly several contested provisions outlined in the suit.
The court specifically listed the affected provisions as paragraphs 3, 7, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 24, 27, 29, and 32 of the regulations.
The judge also barred the commission from taking any steps that could interfere with or prevent members of the plaintiff association from continuing to provide or deploy services or products governed by the regulations.
In addition, the court restrained the FCCPC from imposing sanctions, penalties, fines, or any form of punishment on WASPAN’s members for failure or refusal to comply with the disputed regulatory provisions.
The ruling further prohibits the commission from issuing directives or taking administrative steps towards the enforcement or implementation of the regulations pending the determination of the substantive motion.
ALSO READ: INVESTIGATION: How digital loan providers breach data privacy, violate rights of Nigerians
The interim orders followed the court’s consideration of an affidavit sworn by Mr Stuffman.
Mr Lewis-Allagoa subsequently adjourned the matter until 27 April for the hearing of the motion on notice.
Background
The FCCPC started the enforcement of the Digital, Electronic, Online or Non-Traditional Consumer Lending Regulations in September 2025 in response to widespread consumer complaints about exploitative practices, data privacy violations, abusive loan recovery methods, harassment, and anti-competitive behaviour among some digital lenders.
According to the commission’s Director of Corporate Affairs, Ondaje Ijagwu, the regulations were issued pursuant to Sections 17, 18, and 163 of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act (2018) to strengthen consumer protection.
The framework mandates transparency, fairness, responsible lending practices, data privacy compliance, and accessible redress mechanisms under the oversight of the FCCPC.
The commission said the regulations, which took effect on 21 July 2025, empower it to register, monitor, and sanction operators in the digital lending space.
They apply to all unsecured consumer lending conducted through electronic, online, mobile, or other non-traditional channels, with requirements covering registration, transparency, ethical debt recovery, and fair lending practices.
However, some lenders have argued that interest rates should reflect the cost of funds and credit risk rather than be subject to regulatory controls. It warned that excessive restrictions could disrupt the high-risk digital lending market and limit financial inclusion.
