Introduction
Nigeria’s competition law journey is still relatively young, but its impact on market behaviour, regulatory thinking, and business strategy is already becoming evident. The enactment of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act (FCCPA) in 2019 and the establishment of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) marked a defining moment in Nigeria’s economic governance. For the first time, the country adopted, a comprehensive, economy-wide competition framework aligned with global best practices.
As discussions at the Competition Law in Action: Compliance, Enforcement, and Business Strategy in Nigeria forum, organised on 26 November 2025 by the Nigeria–South Africa Chamber of Commerce and sponsored by Streamsowers & Köhn, underscored, the effectiveness of competition law is measured not only by statutory provisions or institutional mandates, but by the extent to which its principles are understood, accepted, and applied by businesses, regulators, and consumers alike. For Nigeria’s competition regime to deliver lasting value, it must move beyond formal compliance and enforcement to become embedded in market behaviour and corporate decision-making, evolving into a shared culture that supports fair competition, consumer welfare, and sustainable economic growth.
Restrictive Agreements: Drawing the Line Between Coordination and Collaboration
At the foundation of competition law is the principle that firms should compete independently rather than coordinate to distort market outcomes. The FCCPA prohibits restrictive agreements such as price-fixing, market allocation, output limitation, and bid rigging, conduct that undermines consumer welfare and market efficiency. These prohibitions reflect well-established international norms, including those under EU, South African, and Kenyan competition law regimes.
However, as practitioners and regulators alike recognise, not all coordination is harmful. In sectors such as energy, telecommunications, infrastructure, and consumer goods, legitimate cooperation through joint ventures, distribution arrangements, or standard-setting initiatives can generate efficiencies, promote innovation, and expand consumer access. The policy challenge lies in distinguishing anti-competitive collusion from efficiency-enhancing collaboration.
Experience shared at the forum highlighted the importance of early competition risk assessment in commercial arrangements. Businesses that embed competition analysis at the contracting stage are better positioned to structure collaborations that comply with the law while delivering economic benefits. The availability of exemptions under the FCCPA reflects an appreciation that competition law should not stifle productive cooperation but rather channel it toward outcomes that serve the public interest.
Abuse of Dominance: Regulating Conduct, Not Success
One of the most nuanced aspects of competition enforcement is abuse of dominance. Dominance, in itself, is not unlawful. Many Nigerian markets are structurally concentrated due to capital intensity, regulatory history, or infrastructure constraints that predate competition law. What the FCCPA prohibits is the abuse of market power through conduct that excludes competitors or exploits consumers.
Panel discussions emphasised that enforcement in this area must be careful, evidence-based, and context-sensitive. Practices such as excessive pricing, refusal to deal, or exclusionary contracting require rigorous economic analysis and an understanding of sector-specific realities. The FCCPC’s use of market studies was identified as a critical tool in ensuring informed intervention, particularly in sectors like electricity distribution and digital services.
A recurring theme was that dominance should be disciplined by responsibility, not demonised. Firms with significant market power must recognise their heightened obligations, while regulators must avoid enforcement approaches that inadvertently punish efficiency or legitimate commercial success. The objective is to preserve competitive processes and consumer welfare, not to mandate market structures artificially.
Merger Control: Integrating Competition into Growth Strategy
Merger control represents the most visible interface between competition law and business strategy. Mergers and acquisitions are vital for investment, innovation, and economic growth, but they also carry the risk of reducing competition or entrenching dominance.
The forum highlighted the maturation of Nigeria’s merger review framework, including improved coordination between the FCCPC, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and sector-specific regulators. The application of a substantive test focused on the substantial prevention or lessening of competition, alongside recognition of efficiencies and public interest considerations, reflects increasing regulatory sophistication.
One consistent lesson from practice is that early engagement with regulators matters. Integrating competition analysis into due diligence and transaction design reduces regulatory risk, prevents gun-jumping, and facilitates smoother approvals. In cross-border transactions, the need to assess multi-jurisdictional notification requirements, including under the ECOWAS Regional Competition Authority, further reinforces the strategic importance of competition law in deal-making.
From Enforcement to Culture: The Role of Institutions and Stakeholders
Several panellists emphasised that competition law in Nigeria represents a cultural shift as much as a legal one. Practices once regarded as normal, exclusive arrangements, predatory pricing, or informal coordination, are now subject to regulatory scrutiny. Changing entrenched business behaviour requires sustained advocacy, stakeholder engagement, and capacity building. The FCCPC’s enforcement philosophy was described as one aimed primarily at behavioural modification rather than punishment alone. While sanctions remain necessary, long-term effectiveness depends on clarity, predictability, and proportionality. Collaboration with sector regulators is also essential, given the FCCPC’s role as a generalist authority overseeing diverse markets.
Businesses, for their part, must move beyond reactive compliance. Internal training, compliance audits, and clear reporting mechanisms are critical to embedding competition awareness across organisations, particularly among frontline commercial teams.
Conclusion: Building Competitive Markets for Inclusive Growth
Nigeria’s competition law regime arrived late compared to mature jurisdictions, but it arrived at a critical moment. As the economy diversifies and digital markets expand, competition law will play an increasingly central role in shaping market outcomes, investor confidence, and consumer welfare.
The discussions at this forum reinforce a central insight: competition law succeeds when it becomes part of everyday business decision-making. Effective enforcement, credible institutions, informed businesses, and engaged stakeholders must work together to build markets that reward innovation, efficiency, and fairness.
Competition law in action is not about constraint; it is about creating the conditions for sustainable growth. By internalising competition principles and aligning enforcement with economic realities, Nigeria can build a competitive economy that is not only dynamic, but also inclusive and resilient.