MultiChoice Nigeria Limited, operator of DStv and GOtv, has petitioned the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission over allegations of economic sabotage, tax evasion, unlawful signal interception and intellectual property fraud involving indigenous pay-TV operator Moreplex TV.
The petition has added a new dimension to the long-running dispute between the two companies, which has centred on access to television channels, content rights and alleged exclusivity in Nigeria’s pay-TV market.
The two-page petition, addressed to the EFCC Zonal Director in Ilorin, Kwara State, was signed by Umar Ibrahim Abdulaziz, Head of Anti-Piracy at MultiChoice Nigeria.
In the petition, titled “Petition Against Moreplex TV Ltd for Economic Sabotage, Tax Evasion … Criminal Interception of Signals Contrary to Section 12 of the Cybercrimes Act, and Intellectual Property Fraud,” MultiChoice alleged that Moreplex accessed and retransmitted some of its content and broadcast signals without authorisation.
The company further alleged that the activities resulted in significant revenue losses and affected its tax obligations, putting the financial impact at more than N2 billion.
MultiChoice also accused Moreplex of obtaining and retransmitting signals allegedly originating from a network linked to Eutelsat at 7 degrees.
However, the petition has generated fresh controversy because it comes against the backdrop of an existing civil and commercial dispute between the two pay-TV operators over content access and alleged exclusivity.
Content rights dispute
Available reports indicate that Moreplex instituted proceedings before the Federal High Court, Port Harcourt Judicial Division, challenging MultiChoice’s refusal to sublicense certain channels and alleging breaches of the Nigerian Broadcasting Code.
The suit was filed in 2023, with judgment reportedly delivered on March 8, 2024.
Justice Phoebe M. Ayuba was said to have ruled in favour of Moreplex, declaring MultiChoice’s refusal to sublicense the requested channels unlawful and contrary to provisions of the Broadcasting Code.
The court reportedly ordered MultiChoice to sublicense the channels and awarded N200 million in general damages, alongside 10 per cent post-judgment interest.
The development has intensified debate among industry stakeholders over the nature of the dispute and whether it extends beyond allegations of signal piracy to broader questions surrounding competition, access to premium television content and regulation of Nigeria’s pay-TV industry.
Concerns over criminal proceedings
Moreplex has positioned itself as an indigenous alternative in the Nigerian pay-TV market, offering direct-to-home, digital terrestrial television, video-on-demand and other television services.
Its platform currently carries a range of local and international channels, including several SuperSport-branded channels.
The latest EFCC petition has consequently raised questions about the use of criminal enforcement mechanisms in a dispute that has also involved civil, commercial and regulatory proceedings.
A source familiar with the matter said the issue was not whether allegations of copyright infringement, unlawful signal interception or tax offences should be investigated where credible evidence exists, but whether criminal proceedings should be introduced into a commercial dispute already subjected to judicial scrutiny.
“The key issue is not whether allegations of copyright infringement, unlawful signal interception or tax offences should be investigated where credible evidence exists. Rather, the question being raised is whether a commercial dispute that has already been litigated before a competent court should subsequently become the subject of criminal proceedings in circumstances that could potentially affect the outcome of the underlying commercial battle,” the source said.
The source stressed that the allegations contained in MultiChoice’s petition were yet to be established.
“The document itself shows that MultiChoice approached the EFCC alleging criminal conduct by Moreplex. The allegations contained in the petition are allegations, not findings of guilt, and would have to be established through due process,” the source added.
Questions over N2bn loss claim
The speed with which criminal proceedings were reportedly pursued against Moreplex has also raised concerns among persons familiar with the dispute.
One source questioned how MultiChoice arrived at the alleged N2 billion revenue loss attributed to Moreplex.
“The key question is how MultiChoice came up with the N2 billion figure ascribed solely to Moreplex TV, particularly since there is another company with a similar judgment that is also operating in a similar way,” the source said.
Questions were also raised about the tax evasion allegation and the appropriate agency responsible for investigating such claims.
“How did MultiChoice come up with the tax evasion petition against Moreplex TV? What proof did it present to the EFCC before the commission swung into action? If there is an established case of tax evasion, why is it not the Nigeria Revenue Service investigating?” the source asked.
The source further questioned whether a corporate organisation should be able to deploy public law enforcement institutions as leverage in a civil or commercial dispute.
“Should a corporate organisation be allowed to use public institutions of law to gain advantage in a civil dispute?” the source queried.
Why Ilorin?
Another issue raised was the location where the petition was filed.
The source questioned why MultiChoice submitted the petition to the EFCC office at 10 Oko Street, off Station Road, GRA, Ilorin, Kwara State, rather than Lagos, where MultiChoice has its headquarters and Moreplex also maintains an office.
“Was MultiChoice looking for a favourable and willing unit of the EFCC?” the source asked.
The source also referred to proceedings in a human rights case involving the EFCC, alleging an apparent contradiction in the commission’s handling of the underlying content-rights dispute.
“In an answer to a human rights case filed against EFCC regarding this matter, the EFCC contended that they would wait for the Court of Appeal for the resolution of the content rights dispute. How come the EFCC in Ilorin went to a lower court to file criminal charges against Moreplex TV regarding the same content rights?” the source asked.
Implications for Nigeria’s pay-TV market
The controversy comes as Moreplex increasingly presents itself as an indigenous challenger in a Nigerian pay-TV market historically dominated by major operators.
The company has argued that greater competition is necessary to improve consumer choice and has called for regulatory intervention against what it describes as monopolistic practices.
Moreplex has also positioned itself as a Nigerian and African-oriented pay-TV platform offering consumers alternatives through flexible pricing and a mix of local and international programming.
Industry analysts say the dispute could therefore have implications beyond the two companies, particularly for competition policy, intellectual property protection, broadcasting regulation and the growth of indigenous businesses.
They argue that where criminal proceedings arise from conduct connected to a commercial dispute over content access, regulators and law enforcement authorities must demonstrate that competition rules, broadcasting regulations, copyright laws, tax laws and criminal statutes are being applied independently and consistently.
The EFCC petition, however, does not by itself establish that Moreplex committed any of the offences alleged by MultiChoice. The allegations remain subject to investigation and, where applicable, determination through due legal process.
The dispute could ultimately become an important test of how Nigeria balances the intellectual property and revenue interests of established broadcasters with competition, regulatory fairness and the development of indigenous players in the country’s rapidly evolving pay-TV industry.
