ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION NOT FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT IN NIGERIA -NERC

download 76

ELECTRICITY COMSUMPTION NOT FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT IN NIGERIA, NERC

The Nigeria Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) has said that electricity consumption is not a fundamental right that can be challenged by any consumer in Nigeria.

NERC’s legal team’s position is against a suit which had asked the Federal High Court Abuja to restrain it and the Abuja Electricity Distribution Company (AEDC) from giving effect and continuing with the implementation of multi-year tariff order 2024 which classified electricity consumers into Band A to E.

The restraining requests was filed by Barrister Festus Sanmi Onifade, who stated he sued for himself and on behalf of other consumers in suit no FHC/ABJ/CS/492/2024.

In his affidavit in support of the originating summons dated April 16, 2024, Onifade contested the various power supply timelines set for residents in Nigeria, insisting that a 20-hour power supply to Band A residents alone amounts to preferential treatment and discrimination of other Nigerians.

He faulted the electricity price increment and downgrading insisting that he and other customers who are on B, C, D and E are seeing their fundamental right to freedom from discrimination being breached by the development.

He was of the view that the policy of classification by NERC allegedly gives a preferential treatment to Customers in band A over and above the Claimant and other customers in band B, C, D and E respectively.

The lawyer sought both interim and perpetual order, restraining NERC, AEDC and the Attorney-General of the Federation from continuing with the policy of classification of Nigerian customers to Band A, B, C, D and E by their location and increasing their tariffs.

In its notice of preliminary objection seen by Nairametrics, NERC’s lawyers, Harry O. Ukaejiofor and Safiiya Mohammed, asked Justice Inyang Ekwo to strike out the suit.

They argued that the classification of electricity consumers into Band A, B, C, D & E does not amount to discrimination as outlined by the claimant.

“There are no fundamental rights to electricity, and the plaintiffs by this action erroneously seeking to enforce a customer/consumer right against his service providers and their regulator in the guise of a fundamental right, “ NERC stated in its processes.

NERC’s legal team further explained that there is no evidence that the claimant complied with the condition in Chapter IV of the NERC’s Customer Protection Regulations 2023.

NERC’s Customer Protection Regulations 2023 states that the claimant’s complaint should be entertained first by the Consumer Complaint Unit of the AEDC and the forum established by the NERC in Abuja before he can approach the court with his complaint.

“The failure of the Plaintiff to comply with the aforesaid condition precedents makes this action unnecessary and premature.

“This Honorable Court lacks the jurisdiction and/or competence to entertain this action as presently constituted and as such the court ought to strike out this action, “ NERC submiited.

The case is adjourned to 23 September for further mention.

NERC had announced a new electricity tariff increase for customers in the Band A category from N66/kWh to N225kWh, that is, those enjoying a 20-hour electricity supply daily.

NERC revealed the Federal Government planned to save N1.5 trillion with the tariff adjustment while subsidizing Bands below the A classification.

The Commission had fined Abuja Disco N20 million for wrongfully billing Band B customers with Band A electricity tariff rate.

The policy intends to align tariffs with the quality of service provided, and the latest order from the NERC aims to ensure that DisCos fully recover operational costs and earn a reasonable return on investment.The court has now been invited to interpret the legality of NERC’s policy among other things.

  • Dons Eze

    DONS EZE, PhD, Political Philosopher and Journalist of over four decades standing, worked in several newspaper houses across the country, and rose to the positions of Editor and General Manager. A UNESCO Fellow in Journalism, Dr. Dons Eze, a prolific writer and author of many books, attended several courses on Journalism and Communication in both Nigeria and overseas, including a Postgraduate Course on Journalism at Warsaw, Poland; Strategic Communication and Practical Communication Approach at RIPA International, London, the United Kingdom, among others.

    Related Posts

    STOP KILLING NIGERIANS, ECONOMY – NLC TELLS TINUBU’S GOVT

    STOP KILLING NIGERIANS, ECONOMY – NLC TELLS TINUBU’S GOVT The President of the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC), Joe Ajaero, has cautioned the President Bola Tinubu-led government and Electricity Distribution Companies over the hike in tariff. Ajaero, in a statement on Thursday, said the hike in electricity, especially for ‘Band A’, has put more companies out of business as well as created more difficulties for consumers. He noted that the NLC’s agitation for the hike subsided because they had a firm assurance from relevant quarters, including the National Assembly, that the matter would be dealt with quietly. The NLC demanded an immediate reversal of the hike, adding that the Government and DISCOs should stop killing the people and the economy. The statement read, “The hike in tariff by DISCOs from N206.80 to N209.5 (with effect from July 1) for the so-called band ‘A’ customers represents the height of impunity and arrogance and will certainly put more companies out of business as well as create more difficulties for consumers. “This increment has come in the heels of unresolved contestations around the insane 250% hike in tariff leading to national paralysis including the shutting down of 300 businesses as per MAN. “The 250% hike drew the ire of the citizenry and rage of organised labour whose members went on a one-day protest for its unreasonableness and violation of extant rules of tariff hike. “We had demanded a reversal. The only reason that action was paused was a firm assurance from relevant quarters, including the National Assembly, that the matter would be dealt with quietly. “That there is another hike instead of a reversal (as promised) is further proof of the insincerity of government just as it is equally a measure of government’s insensitivity. “We have no doubt that this frequent crass display of insincerity and insensitivity will pit the people against the government or vice versa. “The three excuses given by DISCOs (exchange rate, interest rate and cost of gas) as justification for this increase underscore our argument that the government and entities in the energy sector are not serious about finding an enduring solution to our energy crisis. For, clearly, they are treating the symptoms. “Given the further damage this latest wave of increase will do to our economy, we demand an immediate reversal of the hike.“It is unjustifiable, unreasonable and malevolent. Government and DISCOs should stop killing the people and the economy.”

    LAWYER DRAGS ENUGU GOVT TO COURT OVER ALLEGED HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION

    LAWYER DRAGS ENUGU GOVT TO COURT OVER HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION A Nigerian citizen, Barrister Olu Omotayo has instituted a suit at the Enugu State High Court, against Governor Peter Mbah and the state Ministry of Transport over human rights violation and continuous violation of the Road Traffic Law by agents of the state. Omotayo, is president of a human rights organisation, Civil Rights Realisation and Advancement Network (CRRAN, through which he filed the matter. In the suit Omotayo Esq V. Governor of Enugu State and Ministry of Transport, suit No. E/534/2024, the Plaintiff, leading two other lawyers Hammed Wasiu Adeyemi Esq. and Desmond Kakaan Esq. seek the determination of the following questions: Whether by virtue of Section 36(2)(a) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999(as amended) and Article 7 (1) (d), of the African Charter on Human & Peoples Rights, (Ratification and Enforcement Act) Cap. A9 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, can the 2nd defendant arrest, prosecute and impose fine on the Plaintiff for violation of road regulation without hearing from the Plaintiff or allow him to make representation to defend himself. Also, whether the 2nd defendant can lawfully make regulations and impose fine not provided for under the Road Traffic Law in view of the provision of Section 36, Road Traffic Law, Cap 137, Vol. V, Revised Laws of Enugu State of Nigeria,2004, which vested the power in the Commissioner of Police to make Order or by general direction regulate traffic in the state. Upon the Determination of the above-questions, the Plaintiff shall seek the following reliefs; A Declaration that the arrest of the Plaintiff on the 13th February 2024, and the towing of his vehicle while he was sitting therein to the premises of the 2nd defendant by officials of 2nd Defendant popularly refer to as MOT officials, without the Plaintiff committing any offence known to the law constitute a flagrant violation of Section 36(8) and 36(12) Of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (As amended) and Articles 7(2), of the African Charter on Human & Peoples Rights, (Ratification and Enforcement Act) Cap. A9 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004. Omotayo, is equally seeking A declaration that the arrest, and detention of the plaintiffs’ vehicle and the subsequent imposition of fine on the Plaintiff by the defendants without bringing him before a court of competent jurisdiction or allow him to make representation to defend himself violates the cardinal Principle of the right to fair hearing and therefore constitute a flagrant violation of Section 36(2)(a) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999(as amended) and Article 7 (1) (d), of the African Charter on Human & Peoples Rights, (Ratification and Enforcement Act) Cap. A9 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004. A Declaration that by virtue of the Road Traffic Law, Cap 137, Vol. V, Revised Laws of Enugu State of Nigeria,2004, the defendant cannot create penalties for offences unknown to the Road Traffic Law Cap 137, Vol. V, Revised Laws of Enugu State of Nigeria,2004. N30,500 : 00K (Thirty thousand five hundred Naira) being specific damages for unlawful seizure of the Plaintiff vehicle. He is therefore seeking a declaration for N100,000 000 : 00K (One hundred million naira) general damages against the Defendants jointly and severally for trespass to person, unlawful arrest and detention and subjecting the Plaintiff to psychological torture and degrading treatment. Omotayo had in his argument in support of the application submitted that it violates the constitutional right to fair hearing for the defendants and their agents to effect an arrest, prosecute the arrestee and also be the judge who impose penalty on the arrestee. He further argued that the 2nd defendant cannot lawfully make regulations and…

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    You Missed

    BREAKING: NEW UK PRIME MINISTER, KIER STARMER, MAKES TEN CABINET APPOINTMENTS

    STOP KILLING NIGERIANS, ECONOMY – NLC TELLS TINUBU’S GOVT

    BREAKING: PRO-FUBARA LAWMAKERS CHALLENGE APPEAL COURT VERDICT ON PRO-WIKE GROUP AT SUPREME COURT

    LAWYER DRAGS ENUGU GOVT TO COURT OVER ALLEGED HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION

    LP CRISIS: LET’S PUT OUR DIFFERENCES ASIDE, PETER OBI TO PARTY MEMBERS

    COURTS WIELD BIG STICK: VOID EDO, RIVERS CASES, GIVE KANO JUDGES 48 HOURS TO RESIGN APPOINTMENTS