Telecom Service Quality: Operators Urge Lawmakers to Tackle Infrastructure Hurdles

The Association of Licensed Telecommunications Operators of Nigeria (ALTON) has cautioned that calling chief executives of the country’s major network providers before a parliamentary panel will not solve the persistent telecom service quality problem. In a statement released to PUNCH Online on Monday, ALTON chairman Gbenga Adebayo said lasting improvement depends on sustained investment, effective regulation and an enabling operating environment. He rejected the House of Representatives’ plan to compel executives of MTN Nigeria, Airtor Nigeria, Globacom, Mafab Communications and other firms to appear before an ad‑hoc committee by November 4.

The parliamentary committee had earlier threatened to issue arrest warrants for any executive who failed to honor the invitation, a move Adebayo described as a misdirected use of legislative power. He noted that the challenges hurting telecom service quality range from fibre‑optic cable vandalism and inconsistent right‑of‑way fees to multiple taxation, unreliable electricity and bureaucratic delays. Insecurity around telecommunications infrastructure, he added, further discourages private sector investment.

Adebayo argued that these structural problems require coordinated action by government bodies and the private sector, not punitive hearings that duplicate the regulator’s role. “Legislative hearings can be useful instruments of accountability, public engagement and policy development,” he said, acknowledging the public’s right to demand better services while urging lawmakers to focus on policy and infrastructure constraints. He stressed that the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) remains the statutory authority tasked with monitoring service quality, setting standards and sanctioning operators for breaches.

The NCC, however, has limited capacity to address the root causes of network failures. Adebayo pointed out that “sanctions alone cannot build fibre networks, provide electricity to base stations, prevent vandalism or facilitate access to infrastructure.” He called on the National Assembly to complement, rather than duplicate, the regulator’s work, insisting that a supportive policy framework is essential for attracting the capital needed to expand and maintain networks across the country.

ALTON’s chairman also raised constitutional concerns about the summons, referencing Sections 88 and 89 of the 1999 Constitution that define the National Assembly’s investigative powers. He reminded the committee that the association had written to the panel on October 20 to seek clarification on the legitimacy of the summons, and that ALTON had previously filed a suit at the Federal High Court in 2018 seeking an interpretation of legislative oversight powers over telecom operators. The case, he noted, remains pending.

Lawmakers defended the invitation by arguing that individual operators hold separate licences and should be directly accountable to their subscribers. House spokesman Akin Rotimi stressed that customers deal with each service provider separately and therefore should be able to demand accountability from those firms without relying on an industry association. This stance reflects the broader tension between the desire for collective oversight and the need to respect the regulatory framework that governs the sector.

The committee’s investigation was prompted by a wave of consumer complaints about dropped calls, slow internet speeds, failed airtime and data transactions, and inadequate coverage in several communities. The NCC reported that, as of October 20, operators had compensated more than 75 million subscribers for poor service in 2026 and conducted over 6,500 network interventions during the year. Despite these efforts, many users continue to report sub‑par experiences, underscoring the gap between regulatory actions and on‑the‑ground realities.

Industry observers note that Nigeria’s telecom market, one of the largest in Africa, has historically grown despite infrastructure constraints. The sector’s expansion has relied heavily on private capital, and investors often weigh the cost of extending fibre and building base stations against the risk of vandalism or power outages. Frequent disruptions to power supply force operators to run diesel generators, raising operating costs and, indirectly, the price paid by consumers.

Security concerns also play a major role. Vandalism of fibre‑optic cables, sometimes linked to criminal groups seeking to sell scrap metal, can knock out service for thousands of users in a single incident. Such attacks not only degrade quality but also deter investors who fear that returns may be eroded by repeated repairs. Government initiatives aimed at protecting critical infrastructure have been uneven, and the lack of a unified security strategy adds another layer of uncertainty for telecom firms.

Taxation and right‑of‑way fees add further complexity. Operators often encounter varying charges from state and local authorities, creating a patchwork of costs that can delay rollout projects. Multiple taxation, where the same activity is taxed by more than one level of government, has been highlighted as a barrier to efficient deployment of network assets. Streamlining these fiscal policies is frequently cited as a prerequisite for faster, more affordable expansion.

Adebayo urged lawmakers to complement the regulator’s work by addressing policy and infrastructure constraints instead of creating parallel mechanisms of accountability. He said the National Assembly should focus on removing bottlenecks that hinder investment, such as simplifying licensing procedures, harmonising right‑of‑way regulations and providing clearer guidance on tax obligations. By doing so, the legislature would enable operators to allocate resources toward network build‑out rather than legal battles.

He also called for a more robust partnership between the NCC and the private sector. While the regulator can set quality benchmarks and enforce compliance, the capital‑intensive nature of building fibre‑optic backbones and upgrading base stations means that only operators with sufficient funding can meet those standards. A collaborative approach, he suggested, could involve joint‑funded projects, public‑private partnerships or incentives that lower the cost of electricity for towers in remote areas.

Looking ahead, Adebayo reiterated that improving telecom service quality is a shared objective among operators, regulators, lawmakers and consumers. He urged the House of Representatives to create an enabling environment that encourages investment, noting that “my message to Nigerians is simple: we all want better service, but better service requires investment, and investment requires an enabling environment.” The next step, according to ALTON, is for legislators to work with the NCC and the private sector to remove policy bottlenecks and secure the infrastructure needed for a resilient telecommunications network.

The ongoing dialogue between the industry association and the parliamentary committee signals that the debate over how best to safeguard Nigeria’s telecom future is far from settled. Both sides agree that consumers deserve reliable connectivity; the question remains how the nation will align legislative oversight, regulatory authority and private investment to deliver it.