Spectrum, the invisible lifeblood of wireless communication, has quietly shaped Nigeria’s digital economy more than any other infrastructure asset in the last decade. Every phone call, mobile data session, and streaming service depends on the regulated use of spectrum frequencies.In this edition of Telecoms Clinic@ITREALMS with REMMY NWEKE, probes Nigeria’s spectrum licensing and renewal transparency (2015–2025), asking who got what, at what price, and why openness still matters as part of FOI and Data Governance series.
Yet, beyond the fanfare of multi-million-dollar license announcements, one fundamental question often goes unanswered: how transparent is Nigeria’s spectrum licensing and renewal process? Who really got what and at what price?
Between 2015 and 2025, Nigeria’s spectrum landscape has seen major shifts. The Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) has awarded, renewed, and reassigned critical frequencies; from GSM and 3G bands to 4G LTE and, most recently, 5G.
The process, ideally, should balance three goals: ensuring fair market competition, promoting efficient spectrum use, and maximizing public value. But achieving that balance requires openness in both the allocation and renewal mechanisms, which, too often, remain shrouded in bureaucracy and selective disclosure.
Consider the landmark 3.5 GHz 5G auction of December 2021. It was globally praised for its competitiveness and transparency, yielding over $500 million in combined bids from winning operators. The public was able to follow the live bidding process, an unprecedented level of openness in Nigeria’s regulatory history.
Yet, subsequent renewals of legacy 2G, 3G, and even some 4G licenses have occurred behind closed doors, with limited public explanation on valuation, renewal terms, or spectrum efficiency metrics. The inconsistency raised questions about whether transparency in telecoms governance depends on public visibility rather than consistent institutional practice.
The Freedom of Information (FOI) Act, again, provides a legal window into these opaque corners. Citizens, researchers, and journalists can invoke it to request disclosure of spectrum licensing data: details of awarded bands, their corresponding prices, tenure periods, and renewal procedures.
Between 2015 and 2025, Nigeria’s spectrum landscape has seen major shifts. The Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) has awarded, renewed, and reassigned critical frequencies; from GSM and 3G bands to 4G LTE and, most recently, 5G.
The process, ideally, should balance three goals: ensuring fair market competition, promoting efficient spectrum use, and maximizing public value. But achieving that balance requires openness in both the allocation and renewal mechanisms, which, too often, remain shrouded in bureaucracy and selective disclosure.
Consider the landmark 3.5 GHz 5G auction of December 2021. It was globally praised for its competitiveness and transparency, yielding over $500 million in combined bids from winning operators. The public was able to follow the live bidding process, an unprecedented level of openness in Nigeria’s regulatory history.
The Freedom of Information (FOI) Act, again, provides a legal window into these opaque corners. Citizens, researchers, and journalists can invoke it to request disclosure of spectrum licensing data: details of awarded bands, their corresponding prices, tenure periods, and renewal procedures.
Unfortunately, such requests are rarely made, and when made, are often met with bureaucratic hesitation. The result is a regulatory environment that appears orderly from a distance but lacks full public accountability.
A critical part of this debate involves spectrum renewal; the quiet process that determines whether an operator retains its frequency license after expiry. Renewals should follow clear criteria: performance compliance, network quality, service coverage, and financial obligations.
Still, in practice, renewal outcomes are often negotiated between regulators and licensees, with limited visibility into how fees are computed or whether renewal discounts are granted. For instance, some operators have reportedly enjoyed “administrative extensions” without formal renewal disclosures, while others have paid hefty sums with no consistent pricing formula made public.
This opacity has real consequences. When spectrum licenses are renewed without transparent valuation, the government risks underpricing public assets. Conversely, arbitrary pricing can discourage network investment and stifle competition. Either way, consumers lose, through higher tariffs, slower innovation, or reduced network coverage.
Globally, transparency in spectrum management is increasingly tied to accountability in public finance. In countries like the UK and India, regulators maintain public databases detailing every licensed band, holder, and financial term. Such openness not only deters corruption but also encourages efficient spectrum trading and innovation.
A critical part of this debate involves spectrum renewal; the quiet process that determines whether an operator retains its frequency license after expiry. Renewals should follow clear criteria: performance compliance, network quality, service coverage, and financial obligations.
Still, in practice, renewal outcomes are often negotiated between regulators and licensees, with limited visibility into how fees are computed or whether renewal discounts are granted. For instance, some operators have reportedly enjoyed “administrative extensions” without formal renewal disclosures, while others have paid hefty sums with no consistent pricing formula made public.
This opacity has real consequences. When spectrum licenses are renewed without transparent valuation, the government risks underpricing public assets. Conversely, arbitrary pricing can discourage network investment and stifle competition. Either way, consumers lose, through higher tariffs, slower innovation, or reduced network coverage.
Globally, transparency in spectrum management is increasingly tied to accountability in public finance. In countries like the UK and India, regulators maintain public databases detailing every licensed band, holder, and financial term. Such openness not only deters corruption but also encourages efficient spectrum trading and innovation.
ALSO READ:
Nigeria’s NCC invariably emulates this model by publishing a comprehensive, regularly updated “Spectrum Transparency Register” listing all assigned frequencies, their expiration dates, and the outcomes of renewal or reallocation.
Civil society, too, has a role. The telecoms sector may seem too technical for public engagement, but spectrum is ultimately a shared national resource, like airspace or oil blocks. Advocacy groups and media platforms can use the FOI Act to obtain, analyze, and publish accessible data about who controls Nigeria’s airwaves and how much they pay for them.
Civil society, too, has a role. The telecoms sector may seem too technical for public engagement, but spectrum is ultimately a shared national resource, like airspace or oil blocks. Advocacy groups and media platforms can use the FOI Act to obtain, analyze, and publish accessible data about who controls Nigeria’s airwaves and how much they pay for them.
Platforms like Telecoms Clinic@ITREALMS can help demystify these processes, translating complex technical data into civic narratives that encourage informed debate and policy scrutiny, such as this FOI and Data Governance series.
Equally, the Ministry of Communications, Innovation and Digital Economy, under its Digital Economy Blueprint, has the opportunity to institutionalize transparency by linking spectrum licensing to measurable broadband impact.
Equally, the Ministry of Communications, Innovation and Digital Economy, under its Digital Economy Blueprint, has the opportunity to institutionalize transparency by linking spectrum licensing to measurable broadband impact.
Every allocation or renewal should be tied to clear deployment milestones, how many communities connected, how much coverage achieved, and how much tax revenue generated. Publicizing such performance data would align Nigeria’s telecoms regulation with the global ethos of open governance.
Between 2015 and 2025, Nigeria’s digital landscape has evolved from voice dominance to data-driven economies; fintech, e-learning, telemedicine, and digital governance. Yet the spectrum ecosystem that powers this transformation remains only partially visible.
Between 2015 and 2025, Nigeria’s digital landscape has evolved from voice dominance to data-driven economies; fintech, e-learning, telemedicine, and digital governance. Yet the spectrum ecosystem that powers this transformation remains only partially visible.
It is time to bring it fully into the open. The FOI Act gives citizens the right; the NCC holds the responsibility. Transparency should not be a privilege of major auctions but a constant principle of public trust.
As Nigeria edges toward 6G conversations and a hyper-connected future, the integrity of its spectrum governance will determine more than network speed, it will shape the credibility of its digital economy.
Next Week in FOI & Data Governance Series: Cybersecurity Funding & National Digital Safety: Using FOI to Track Investments vs. Results - Telecoms Clinic@ITREALMS by Remmy Nweke.
Short URLs:
goo.gl,
mcaf.ee,
cli.gs
As Nigeria edges toward 6G conversations and a hyper-connected future, the integrity of its spectrum governance will determine more than network speed, it will shape the credibility of its digital economy.
Next Week in FOI & Data Governance Series: Cybersecurity Funding & National Digital Safety: Using FOI to Track Investments vs. Results - Telecoms Clinic@ITREALMS by Remmy Nweke.
No comments:
Post a Comment