Home Business

Broadband Penetration hits 44.5% as NCC reviews Short Code services

August 10, 2022

in Business

VIEWS

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

Nigeria’s broadband usage has continued on the rise, moving up from 40.9% in February 2022 to 44.5% in July 2022, a figure considered hopeful for achieving the national broadband target of 70% in 2025.

Executive Vice-Chairman (EVC) of the Nigeria Communications Commission (NCC), Prof. Umar Garba Danbatta, disclosed this on Tuesday at the beginning of a three-day public inquiry on five telecom regulations and guidelines which began in Abuja.

He said that emerging technologies and advancements in the sector, demand that the Commission be prepared to match these developments with appropriate regulations and guidelines.

“With the technological advancements anticipated in the coming years, it is expected that there will be a proliferation of devices in the industry. It is, therefore, essential for the Commission to ensure that the right regulatory frameworks can accommodate such eventualities”, he said.

At the event which was attended by the entire Board of Commissioners, led by its Chairman, Prof. Adeolu Akande, the Commission’s CEO said the public inquiry which covered five areas of existing regulations, are aimed at achieving operational efficiency and operational excellence. He listed the regulatory instruments under review at the public inquiry to include Type Approval Regulations, Guidelines on Short Code Operation in Nigeria, Guidelines on Technical Specifications for the Deployment of Communications Infrastructure, Guidelines on Advertisements and Promotions and Consumer Code of Practice Regulations.

He said the focus areas were already articulated in some important documents guiding the operations of the Commission, which include the Nigerian National Broadband Plan (NNBP) 2020 – 2025, the National Digital Economy Policy and Strategy (NDEPS) 2020 – 2030, NCC’s Strategic Management Plan (SMP) 2020-2024 and its Strategic Vision Implementation Plan (SVIP) 2021 – 2025, which are being implemented towards achieving its mandate.

While stating that these strides are the results of the Commission’s regulatory efficiency and focused implementation of policies and strategies of the Federal Government of Nigeria, Danbatta said the public inquiry is in tandem with the Commission’s strategy of consulting stakeholders in all its regulatory interventions.

The EVC further stated that the amendment of these regulatory instruments were to reflect current realities, one of which is the anticipated deployment of the Fifth Generation (5G) technology, and management of short codes in Nigeria, including the Toll-Free Emergency Code 112.

Earlier, Head, Telecoms Laws and Regulations at NCC, Helen Obi, had stated that public inquiry allows the Commission to incorporate the comments and suggestions of industry stakeholders, in the development of its regulatory instruments.

She said the process ensures that the Commission’s regulatory instruments are in line with the current realities in the industry as it had done with some regulatory frameworks and guidelines in 2021.

Pharmaceutical companies get N100n FG bailout

Atiku will win in Rivers State, says Babangida Aliyu

Opinion

Suspension of Mike Ozekhome SAN: A Hasty Decision By The LPPC And The Prejudicial Effect Of Same

by Newsdesk Africa

June 26, 2026

By Sheriff. C. ADELE, Esq On June 23, 2026, the Legal Practitioners’ Privileges Committee (LPPC), at its 173rd General Meeting, approved the suspension of Chief Mike Ozekhome from the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN). The suspension, announced pursuant to Paragraph 26(6) of the Guidelines for the Conferment of the Rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria, is to remain in force pending the final determination of disciplinary proceedings before the LPPC’s Disciplinary and Ethics Sub-Committee. While the LPPC asserts that the suspension is intended to "safeguard the integrity, dignity and prestige of the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria", this decision raises profound concerns about procedural propriety, jurisdictional overreach, and the prejudicial effect it portends for both the legal profession and the administration of justice. This article critically examines the hasty decision of the LPPC, its implications, and why it constitutes a premature verdict that undermines the very principles of natural justice the legal profession is sworn to uphold. Chief Mike Ozekhome, a prominent constitutional lawyer and human rights advocate, is currently facing disciplinary proceedings before the LPPC’s Disciplinary and Ethics Sub-Committee. The proceedings relate to his involvement in a controversial property dispute in the United Kingdom concerning a property located at 79 Randall Avenue, London. Chief Ozekhome is also standing trial before an FCT High Court in Maitama, Abuja, on a 12-count charge, to which he has pleaded not guilty. What is particularly significant and troubling is that the same issues before the LPPC are also pending before the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC), the body statutorily charged with the responsibility of sanctioning legal practitioners for professional misconduct. The LPDC is yet to make any determination on the substantive allegations against chief Ozekhome. Yet, the LPPC has proceeded to impose a suspension that, in practical effect, constitutes a pre-determinative sanction. The Distinct Jurisdictions of the LPPC and LPDC To appreciate the gravity of the LPPC’s decision, it is essential to understand the distinct and separate roles of the LPPC and the LPDC under Nigerian law. The LPPC is a statutory body established under Section 5 of the Legal Practitioners Act. Its primary function is to consider and determine eligible applicants for the conferment of the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria. Chaired by the Chief Justice of Nigeria, the LPPC is also empowered to make rules as to the privileges to be accorded to Senior Advocates of Nigeria. While the LPPC has disciplinary powers over SAN holders, these powers are ancillary to its primary function of conferring and regulating the rank. The LPPC's disciplinary authority is derived from its guidelines, including Paragraph 26(6) of the Guidelines for the Conferment of the Rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria. However, this authority is limited to matters pertaining to the rank itself and the privileges associated with it. The LPDC, by contrast, is a committee of the Body of Benchers established under Section 10 of the Legal Practitioners Act. Its mandate is far broader and more fundamental: it is the primary disciplinary body for all legal practitioners in Nigeria. The LPDC exercises jurisdiction over all lawyers called to the Nigerian Bar and is empowered to investigate allegations of professional misconduct and impose sanctions ranging from admonition to suspension and disbarment. The Critical Distinction The distinction between these two bodies is not merely academic, it is fundamental to the proper administration of justice in the legal profession. The LPPC is primarily a conferring and privilege-regulating body. The LPDC is the disciplinary body par excellence. While the LPPC may have incidental disciplinary powers over SAN holders, these powers cannot supplant or pre-empt the primary disciplinary jurisdiction of the LPDC. When the same issues are pending before both bodies, as they are in chief Ozekhome’s case, the LPDC’s determination on professional misconduct must logically precede any disciplinary sanction from the LPPC. The LPPC cannot independently determine facts of professional misconduct that are the exclusive province of the LPDC. The Hasty Decision: A Premature Verdict The LPPC’s decision to suspend chief Ozekhome from the rank of SAN pending the conclusion of disciplinary proceedings is, with respect, a hasty and premature verdict that suffers from several fundamental flaws. Procedural Impropriety ...