Sections 88, 89 Violated? Why Telcos Want Court To Nullify Reps’ Invitation Of CEOs

Telecommunications operators have asked the Federal High Court in Abuja to nullify the invitation of their chief executives by the House of Representatives, arguing that the lawmakers exceeded the constitutional limits of their investigative powers.

The operators contend that Sections 88 and 89 of the 1999 Constitution do not confer unrestricted investigative authority on the National Assembly, insisting that the House’s summonses must fall within the specific purposes permitted by the Constitution.

In suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/2713/2026, filed on November 4, 2026, the Registered Trustees of the Association of Licensed Telecommunications Operators of Nigeria (ALTON), MTN Nigeria Communications Plc, Airtel Networks Limited, Globacom Limited and Emerging Markets Telecommunication Services Limited, operators of 9mobile, challenged the summonses issued on October 29 by the House’s ad-hoc committee on quality of service (QoS).

The defendants are the House of Representatives, its Speaker, the Clerk of the House and the Inspector-General of Police.
At the centre of the operators’ challenge is Section 88(2), which specifies the purposes for which the National Assembly and its committees may conduct investigations.

These include enabling lawmakers to make laws, exposing corruption, inefficiency or waste in the execution of laws, and examining the administration of funds appropriated by the legislature.

The plaintiffs argue that the constitutional provisions do not authorise the House to conduct investigations outside these defined purposes, particularly where the companies concerned are private entities that do not administer public funds in the manner contemplated by the Constitution.

They also contend that the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act, 2017, cannot confer investigative powers beyond those expressly granted by the Constitution.

A major part of their argument concerns the statutory authority of the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC), which regulates the telecommunications industry.
Relying on Sections 4, 70 and 105 of the Nigerian Communications Act, 2003, and the Nigerian Communications (Quality of Service) Regulations, 2024, the operators argue that the NCC has specific responsibilities for establishing, monitoring, investigating and enforcing quality-of-service standards.

According to the plaintiffs, the House cannot assume, duplicate or interfere with these regulatory functions outside the investigative powers permitted by the Constitution.

The suit also raises concerns about the potential implications of the House’s proceedings for two pending cases: HCS/261/2025, instituted by Mr Fatokunboh Fagun and another on behalf of themselves and MTN subscribers, and FHC/ABJ/CS/1886/2026, filed by Kaatruths Podcast Limited and another.

The operators argue that continuing the legislative proceedings could prejudice issues already before the courts.

Consequently, they are asking the Federal High Court to set aside the summonses and restrain the defendants from enforcing them, including through arrest warrants.

They are also seeking orders to prevent investigations or recommendations capable of interfering with the pending litigation.

The court’s eventual determination will have implications for the boundaries of legislative investigative powers and the statutory responsibilities of sector regulators.