President Bola Tinubu’s recent restructuring of the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) Board, following Senate approval on December 16th, signifies yet another attempt to revitalize a regulatory body struggling to overcome a reputation of ineffectiveness.
The appointment of Dr. Musiliu Olalekan Oseni as chairman arrives at a pivotal moment for Nigeria’s power sector – a sector plagued by persistent power outages, widespread consumer frustration, and a profound lack of trust in regulatory oversight. The newly formed board faces the formidable task of severing ties with past shortcomings.
Dr. Oseni, having been with NERC since 2017 and progressively advancing to the role of vice chairman, provides valuable institutional knowledge and continuity amidst this period of significant transformation. His term, extending until the completion of his legally mandated 10-year period under the Electricity Act of 2023, positions him centrally in the processes of licensing, tariff approvals, and regulatory compliance – the crucial mechanisms determining whether Nigeria’s electricity market finds stability or continues to decline. His promotion, which took effect on December 1, 2025, coincides with a major legal and structural shift in the power sector, the most significant in over two decades.
This restructuring, therefore, represents another critical juncture in Nigeria’s protracted and challenging journey toward electricity sector reform. It goes beyond a routine administrative action, arriving at a time when the Commission faces a crisis of legitimacy that has persisted for years. Chronic underperformance, weak enforcement, concerns surrounding undue influence by powerful market players, inadequate consumer protection, and a steady decline in public confidence have all converged, making comprehensive reform an absolute necessity. After more than a decade of NERC’s operation, Nigeria’s power sector remains largely dysfunctional – characterized by unpredictable supply, crumbling infrastructure, estimated billing practices, and continuous disputes over tariffs. A regulatory body presiding over such systemic failure inevitably invites calls for change; one that fails to regulate effectively must itself undergo reform.
NERC has frequently faced accusations of interference from the executive branch, regulatory capture by influential market participants—particularly Distribution Companies (DisCos) and Generation Companies (GenCos)—and an inability to administer sanctions impartially. Regulatory independence isn’t merely desirable; it’s absolutely vital. Without it, consumers remain vulnerable, and operators lack discipline. Thus, reconstituting the Board became essential to restoring both credibility and autonomy.
Perhaps the most damaging accusation leveled against NERC has been its perceived failure to safeguard consumer interests. Estimated billing persists despite repeated directives against it. Consumer complaints remain unresolved, while DisCos routinely disregard service standards with little to no repercussions. Despite possessing considerable authority under the Electric Power Sector Reform Act, defaulting DisCos continue to operate without facing serious penalties. Performance agreements are breached with impunity, and investment and service delivery obligations are routinely ignored. A regulator incapable of enforcing its own rules invites irrelevance.
Under the previous Board, NERC seemed more focused on tariff increases than on demonstrating tangible improvements in electricity supply. The implementation of Service-Based Tariffs (SBT) was based on the premise that higher tariffs would be applied only in areas where supply hours had improved. However, widespread complaints emerged from consumers placed on higher tariff bands without experiencing the promised minimum hours of supply. Millions of consumers remain without meters, while arbitrary and inflated estimated bills continue to be prevalent—often bearing no correlation to actual energy usage. These practices directly contradicted NERC’s own Meter Asset Provider (MAP) regulations and were widely perceived as a form of institutionalized exploitation. The commission has been repeatedly criticized for failing to penalize DisCos for persistent overbilling.
The challenge facing the new NERC Board is therefore clear: regulation must transition from prioritizing revenue protection to ensuring service delivery. The credibility of this new leadership will be judged not by policy documents or press releases, but by concrete results: improved hours of electricity supply, fair and transparent billing practices (including the abolishment of the band system – consumers should pay according to the electricity they receive). The new NERC should prioritize the swift resolution of consumer complaints and demonstrate visible enforcement of regulations. Years of unreliable power supply, inflated bills, and lax oversight have left Nigerians paying more for less.
The collapse of the national grid on December 29, 2025, which plunged most of the country into darkness, was not an isolated incident. It was the fourth major grid failure within a single year. The Nigerian Independent System Operator (NISO) labeled it a “system disturbance,” but Nigerians recognize it for what it truly is: a recurring national disgrace. How much longer will the country tolerate grid collapses as a regular occurrence? Blackouts, it seems, have become normalized.
This is the bleak backdrop against which the newly appointed NERC Board must function. The task ahead is well-defined and urgent: tariffs must be firmly and transparently linked to service delivery. The service-based tariff system must be effective, not just a formality on paper. Where supply is inadequate, tariffs must automatically decrease. Refunds and downgrades for customers should be processed without delay. Regulation must reward strong performance and penalize failure.
Estimated billing remains the most conspicuous symbol of regulatory failure. It is unjust, disproportionately affects the poor, and erodes public trust. Universal metering must therefore be treated as an urgent priority, not a long-term goal. Clear deadlines must be enforced, and Distribution Companies that continue to engage in arbitrary billing should face significant sanctions, including potential license reviews. Electricity regulation isn’t about guaranteeing profits for inefficient operators; it’s about striking a balance between investor confidence and consumer protection.
Electricity tariffs impact every household and business. However, tariff-setting has often been obscured by technical jargon and rushed consultations. Nigerians deserve a clear understanding of why they are paying what they pay. The new Board must simplify explanations of tariff structures, publish performance data, and operate with transparency. One of the most damaging legacies of the past is the culture of impunity that has taken root within the electricity market.
The new NERC Board must reinstate a sense of accountability through regulation—fair, lawful, but decisive. Sanctions must be swift, public, and proportionate. Publicly identifying and shaming repeat offenders should become standard practice.
Equally vital is restoring the authority of the regulator. A market without consequences cannot function effectively. License conditions, performance agreements, and consumer protection regulations must be enforced firmly, consistently, and openly. Transparency must also define this new era of regulation. Tariff-setting should no longer be hidden behind technical complexities. Nigerians are entitled to clear explanations of how tariffs are determined and access to data on supply levels, system losses, and collections. Regulation conducted in secrecy only fuels suspicion and resentment.
As the Electricity Act creates opportunities for state-level electricity markets, NERC’s role is evolving, not diminishing. The regulator must now manage a more complex and decentralized power landscape—one that encourages distributed generation, state participation, and innovation without creating regulatory confusion. Clarity, coordination, and fairness must guide interactions between federal and state electricity markets.
Nigerians are tired of reforms that achieve nothing. This Board has a limited window to demonstrate that regulation can finally serve the public interest. The responsibility is substantial, but the test is simple: deliver electricity, justify bills, and protect consumers
