The Electricity Consumers Protection Advocacy Centre (ECPAC) has called on the Federal Government to include consumer representatives in the committee overseeing the decentralisation of Nigeria’s electricity market, warning that reforms affecting tariffs, service standards and market structure should not proceed without the direct participation of those who pay for electricity.
The demand follows the recent inauguration of a nine-member inter-agency committee by the Minister of Power, Mr Joseph Tegbe, to address issues arising from the decentralisation of the electricity market and the implementation of the Electricity Act, 2023.
The committee is expected to sustain engagement among relevant institutions, review concerns raised during a workshop on market decentralisation and submit recommendations within four weeks.
However, the Executive Director of ECPAC, Mr Princewill Okorie, said the composition excluded the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission and organised electricity consumer advocacy groups.
Speaking at a news conference in Abuja, Okorie argued that consumers were central stakeholders on the demand side of the market and should not be treated merely as end-users whose interests could be represented indirectly by regulators, operators or government agencies.
“The committee members were drawn from the electricity supply and demand industry, while consumers, who are the key stakeholders on the demand side, were clearly excluded,” he said.
Committee dominated by institutions and operators
According to Okorie, the committee includes representatives of the Ministry of Power, Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission, Nigerian Electricity Management Services Agency, Transmission Company of Nigeria, Bureau of Public Enterprises and Nigerian Bulk Electricity Trading Plc.
It also has representatives of the Rural Electrification Agency, Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation, Nigeria Governors’ Forum, Association of Nigerian Electricity Distributors and generation companies.
The membership brings together key institutions responsible for regulation, policy, market operations, electricity supply and subnational participation. But ECPAC maintains that this institutional breadth is incomplete without a recognised consumer voice.
Okorie said the exclusion of consumer advocates and the FCCPC was inconsistent with Section 34(1)(f) of the Electricity Act, 2023, which requires electricity regulation to maintain a fair balance among consumers, licensees and investors.
His intervention raises a larger question at the centre of Nigeria’s power-sector reforms: can a decentralised electricity market be considered inclusive if consumers are not represented in the design of the rules governing pricing, service obligations and dispute resolution?
Decentralisation raises new consumer questions
The Electricity Act opened the way for states to establish and regulate electricity markets within their jurisdictions, creating the possibility of a more decentralised system alongside the national market.
In principle, this could encourage local investment, speed up project approvals and allow states to develop electricity solutions suited to their industrial, commercial and household needs.
It may also create space for embedded generation, mini-grids, renewable energy, independent distribution networks and state-backed power projects.
But decentralisation also introduces new complexity.
Consumers could face different tariffs, standards, regulators and complaint systems across states. Weak coordination could create regulatory overlap, uneven protection and uncertainty over which institution is responsible when service failures occur.
That is why consumer representation matters. Households and businesses experience the electricity market through estimated bills, meter availability, outages, disconnections, voltage fluctuations and complaint resolution.
A committee focused mainly on institutions and operators may understand the technical and commercial structure of the sector while overlooking how reforms affect daily users.
ECPAC raises concern over alleged “electricity crimes”
Okorie also urged the Federal Government to confront what he described as electricity crimes allegedly committed by licensed distribution companies against consumers.
He listed such practices as unlawful billing, illegal disconnections, bulk billing, failure to repair faults within customer-service timelines and the unauthorised takeover of infrastructure financed by communities or other non-licensees.
He also included electricity theft and vandalism, although those offences are often committed against operators and infrastructure rather than by licensed companies.
Okorie said some practices attributed to distribution companies violated Section 29(6) of NERC’s Customer Protection Regulation.
The concerns reflect longstanding tension between consumers and electricity distributors over billing transparency, metering shortages, poor service and the ownership of transformers, poles and other infrastructure funded by communities.
Distribution companies, for their part, face significant operational difficulties, including low collections, energy theft, vandalism, old networks and a large revenue shortfall.
A functioning market must therefore protect consumers without ignoring the commercial sustainability of operators.
Market and investor implications
A credible decentralised market could attract investment into generation, distribution, metering, storage and renewable energy.
States with strong regulatory institutions may become more competitive destinations for manufacturers and infrastructure investors seeking dependable electricity.
However, investors also need social legitimacy.
Tariff increases, infrastructure projects and regulatory decisions are more likely to succeed where consumers understand the reasons behind them and have trusted channels for challenging abuse.
Excluding consumer groups could deepen resistance to reforms and increase reputational and political risks for operators.
Consumer inclusion should therefore not be viewed as anti-investor. Properly structured, it can improve market credibility, reduce disputes and strengthen public acceptance of commercially necessary reforms.
Brand implications
For the Federal Government and the Ministry of Power, the decentralisation process is a major governance and reform-brand test.
A committee perceived as dominated by operators and institutions could weaken confidence in the fairness of the exercise.
For distribution companies, allegations of unlawful billing and poor service remain a serious reputational burden. Consumers are unlikely to trust a market that asks them to pay higher tariffs without delivering better metering, reliability and complaint resolution.
The power sector’s brand problem is not only inadequate electricity. It is the widespread perception that consumers bear the cost of a system over which they have little influence.
BRANDECONOMY Insight
Electricity-market decentralisation could become one of Nigeria’s most consequential economic reforms.
It could attract investment, support state-level industrialisation and create more responsive electricity markets.
But decentralisation should not merely transfer authority from one set of institutions to another. It must improve accountability to consumers.
The Federal Government should expand the committee to include credible consumer representatives and the FCCPC. Their participation would not weaken technical decision-making; it would add practical knowledge of billing, service failure and household affordability.
A market designed without consumers may be structurally elegant but socially fragile.
Nigeria’s electricity market decentralisation and electricity reform will succeed only when investors can earn sustainable returns, operators can recover efficient costs and consumers can receive reliable service under fair and enforceable rules.
