Call grows for clear digital policy, flexible telecom

By Chinenye Anuforo
[email protected]

The country’s rapidly evolving digital landscape has outgrown the narrow boundaries of traditional telecommunications regulation, prompting renewed calls for a broader digital economy policy and a more flexible regulatory framework capable of responding to emerging technologies and changing market realities.

Industry veterans and architects of Nigeria’s telecom reforms made this case during a panel session examining the country’s telecommunications policy journey and the future direction of the sector.

The experts, including former Executive Vice Chairman of the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC), Dr. Ernest Ndukwe, and Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Paul Usoro, argued that the realities driving communications today are fundamentally different from those that shaped the landmark 2000 National Telecommunications Policy and the Nigerian Communications Act of 2003.

Their intervention comes as conversations intensify around the review of the nation’s telecommunications policy framework and the need to align regulation with innovations such as Over-The-Top (OTT) services, digital platforms, data-driven technologies and the wider digital economy.

Usoro, who played a role in the legal and policy processes that shaped telecom reforms, raised a fundamental question about whether the country should still be regulating the industry through a largely telecom-focused lens.

According to him, technological convergence and the emergence of digital communications platforms have altered the sector so significantly that policymakers must rethink the scope of future regulation.

“Today, however, we are dealing with entirely new realities, including OTT platforms and emerging digital technologies. This raises an important question: should we still be talking about a telecom policy, or should we now be thinking in terms of a broader communications or digital economy policy?” Usoro asked.

He noted that when the Nigerian Communications Act came into force in 2003, the sector was still predominantly voice-driven and telecommunications regulation was largely centred on conventional telecom services.

However, the communications ecosystem has since evolved beyond voice services into a complex digital environment powered by internet-based platforms, data services and technology-driven applications.

According to him, this evolution requires a policy framework capable of addressing both current realities and future disruptions.

Usoro emphasised that policy must remain the foundation upon which laws are built, warning that weak or outdated policy direction often produces ineffective legal frameworks.

Perhaps not sufficiently appreciated, he said, is the close relationship between policy and legislation.

“The legal framework must necessarily flow from the policy,” he stated.

He explained that Nigeria’s telecom success story itself validated this principle, recalling that the National Telecommunications Policy developed in 2000 eventually shaped the Nigerian Communications Act enacted in 2003.

“As we review the policy, it is important to ensure that its contents are capable of being reflected effectively in the law. The policy must contain directives that will continue to drive the growth of the industry,” he said.

Usoro praised aspects of the 2000 telecom policy, particularly provisions that strengthened the authority and independence of the NCC.

He recalled that the policy clearly empowered the regulator to take decisions regarding licensing, tariffs, interconnection and disputes affecting operators.

That institutional independence, he argued, helped create the regulatory certainty required to attract investors and drive market confidence during Nigeria’s telecom liberalisation period.

While discussing the sector’s historical transition from monopoly to competition, Usoro acknowledged the shortcomings associated with the former Nigerian Telecommunications Limited (NITEL) but cautioned against dismissing its contributions entirely.

“Despite the criticisms, we cannot ignore the fact that NITEL built a significant portion of the infrastructure that still exists today,” he said.

Providing broader historical context, Ndukwe traced the nation’s telecommunications development from the colonial telegraph era to the liberalisation reforms that transformed the industry.

According to him, telecommunications in Nigeria began in 1886 with the laying of the first telegraph cable, but progress remained painfully slow for decades.

He recalled that at independence in 1960, Nigeria had only about 18,724 telephone lines, while the creation of NITEL in the mid-1980s failed to deliver the widespread expansion and quality of service expected from a national telecom operator.

By 2000, he said, NITEL’s subscriber base had risen to only about 400,000 fixed lines despite a national population estimated at about 120 million.

Even more troubling, he noted, was that nearly half of those lines were concentrated in government institutions and large organisations, leaving ordinary Nigerians with limited access to telecommunications services.

“At the time, Nigeria ranked among countries with the lowest teledensity in the world,” Ndukwe recalled.

He explained that these realities forced the government to pursue bold reforms, leading to the adoption of the 2000 National Telecommunications Policy and subsequent liberalisation of the sector.

The opening of previously monopolised market segments and the licensing of digital mobile operators in 2001, he said, changed the trajectory of Nigeria’s communications industry.

According to him, liberalisation brought fresh investment, expanded network coverage, improved service quality and made telecom services more affordable and accessible.

Ndukwe, however, warned that the next phase of growth would depend on policy flexibility and the willingness of regulators and government to adapt to technological change.

He cautioned policymakers against designing rigid regulatory frameworks tied to specific technologies.

“We should not be too prescriptive of technology. It must be such that we remain relevant,” he said.

He argued that the speed of innovation now demands continuous policy review and adaptive regulation.

“The regular review I have suggested is useful and I think it is worth doing. The new policy that we are now developing should not be too prescriptive on technology because technology changes so quickly,” he added.

Beyond technology neutrality, Ndukwe identified strong enabling laws, stakeholder consultation and regulatory independence as critical foundations for a healthy telecom and digital economy ecosystem.

He maintained that regulators must remain insulated from political and administrative interference if they are to sustain investor confidence and protect public interest.

“Regulators must be protected from political and administrative interference in order to maintain the confidence of investors, consumers and other stakeholders,” he said.

According to him, stakeholder engagement also remains indispensable, noting that consultations played a major role in shaping important NCC decisions such as spectrum auctions and licensing processes during the reform years.

He warned, however, that consultation should not become a substitute for decisive regulation.

“Delayed decisions can discourage investment and slow down sectoral growth,” Ndukwe cautioned.

The panel session formed part of ongoing discussions around the review of Nigeria’s telecommunications policy and the future direction of communications regulation in an increasingly digital economy.