Nigerians have long grumbled about the rising cost of cable television. When Multichoice Nigeria recently hiked DStv subscription prices by 25 per cent, public outrage followed. Not just because the increase hurt, but because the new pricing felt like extortion: pay up or miss out. For many, there is no real alternative to watching the English Premier League. Now, a court has ruled that regulators cannot compel Multichoice to reverse the hike. On paper, that is a win for the free market. In reality, it is a cautionary tale about what happens when lawmakers forget or fail to build guardrails into “deregulation”.

The judgment by Justice Omotoso was technically sound. It noted that Nigeria’s Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission lacks explicit price-fixing powers without the approval of the President. But the court also called pay TV “non-essential”. Labelling it a luxury Nigerians can live without. Tell that to the sports bars scattered around the country running on DStv. When a service becomes culturally embedded, should it be dismissed as discretionary? That logic feels disconnected from Nigeria’s lived economic reality. It is like declaring Uber as “non-essential” in a city that has no functioning public transport system.

This is not really about football. It is about a pattern that is becoming all too familiar, and petroleum pricing is following the same trajectory. The National Assembly has largely avoided crafting coherent legislation to balance deregulation with equity. The result? A petrol market where the dominant local refiner is accusing a shadowy cabal of undermining the country’s energy security, while simultaneously suing to block petrol imports, even as global oil prices fall and imported fuel is sometimes cheaper than local supply.

The parallels to MultiChoice’s de facto monopoly are glaring. What we are witnessing is regulatory timidity: lawmakers clinging to free-market rhetoric while enabling markets where “freedom” just means the biggest player wins.

Nigeria and the legislature’s current playbook seem to be to slap import bans to boost local production. This is deja vu. We have seen it before. However, import substitution policies collapsed under inefficiency and corruption. The factories for “Made In Nigeria” goods became graft machines. Today’s refinery push is nobly intentioned. The Dangote Petroleum Refinery is a $20bn marvel of engineering and can signify a new phase in Nigeria and Africa’s ambitions to become a global powerhouse. But, without transparent pricing frameworks, we are swapping imports for a domestic oligarchy. Deregulation is not about allowing the market to run free and wild. There is also work to be done, work that creates rules that will allow competition to thrive.

Ghana’s petroleum sector deregulation offers Nigeria a clue. Prices are liberalised, but Ghana’s National Petroleum Authority publishes a pricing formula that accounts for international crude prices, exchange rates, distribution margin and taxes. America’s Federal Trade Commission, while barred from directly setting prices, aggressively sues companies for collusion. Nigeria’s FCCPC? Stuck in a legal no man’s land, armed with investigative powers and zero teeth. The MultiChoice ruling proves that regulators in Nigeria swing between impotence and overreach because they have no clear legislative mandate.

For free markets to work, consumers must have choices. But when we have sectors dominated by one or two players, like pay TV or petrol, that invisible hand becomes a fist. MultiChoice knows this. Everybody knows this. Yet, the legislature remains allergic to nuance. “Deregulate!” and then, they act surprised when the market tilts towards a monopoly. The Nigerian Senate Committee on Energy’s silence on updating the FCCPC Act speaks volumes. Why should they overhaul laws when they can grandstand about “saboteurs” and “foreign interests”?

But, to be honest, regulation is not easy. Overdo it, investors are spooked. Underdo it and citizens suffer. Still, Nigeria’s current approach is the worst of both worlds. Regulatory bodies are operating on half-baked laws. The FCCPC tried to act in the MultiChoice case but got dismissed for overstepping. Earlier this year, another court dismissed the FCCPC’s request to join and challenge the Dangote Petroleum Refinery suit to ban the import licence. It is a mess.

There are three painfully obvious fixes, but I am also very sceptical about Nigeria’s legislative arm’s appetite for them.

Legislate with laser focus. There are several additions that can be made and powers given to regulators to allow them to do their job. Perhaps deregulation and mandatory price hearings will prevent refiners and “cabals” from price fixing.

Redefine what essential means. Pay TV fuels small businesses in Nigeria battling with an unemployment crisis and an inflation problem. Perhaps it deserves more scrutiny. Petrol certainly deserves all the scrutiny Nigerian lawmakers can muster.

Learn from America’s FTC. Allow regulators not only to investigate but also publish anti-market practices and collusion.

But will this happen? Nigeria’s Senate Committee on Energy doesn’t excite me. But, here’s a thought. Maybe the MultiChoice saga will shame Nigeria’s lawmakers into action. Nothing seems to move Nigerians like the threat of missing a big match or the happening Telenovela. If they won’t act for the good of the common man, maybe they might do it for the English Premier League.

It appears that Nigeria’s political class is far removed and, as a consequence, comfortable with the status quo. It’s why these gaps have remained unfixed. But if Nigerian courts take up cases that should be left to regulators, strike down regulators for acting beyond shaky mandates, and the lawmakers do nothing to clarify the mandates, where does this leave Nigerians? We are seeing lawmakers dodge their responsibilities in real-time.

We are seeing a loop that will remain for a long time; prices will rise, citizens will complain, and regulators will fail while making some grand gesture.

The MultiChoice saga is a harbinger of Nigeria’s deregulated sectors. If lawmakers continue to give Nigerians bare minimum frameworks, we risk replicating this scenario in other sectors like petrol, telecommunications and even essential services.

Without prompt legislative action, another price hike in Nigeria could mean Nigerians are held hostage by an electricity provider or a single importer. The question is not whether Nigerians can survive without TV, but whether we are prepared to accept a future where every sector becomes like MultiChoice’s. Do we want a Nigeria where citizens have only one option at any cost? If the NASS does not legislate for fairness, maybe it will legislate for market attractiveness.

Adeshokan, a sociologist, writes from Abuja