The enactment of Nigeria’s Electricity Act 2023 represents a paradigm shift from a centralized to a decentralized model of electricity governance, aiming to empower States and catalyse investment. However, this legislative ambition has been critically tested in practice. This study employs a qualitative, desktop research methodology to conduct a critical policy analysis, assessing the regulatory gaps within the Electricity Act 2023 through the empirical lens of the Imo State electricity crisis. Guided by Institutional Theory, the research investigates how ambiguities in the Act have fostered regulatory conflict and how the absence of clear investor-entry frameworks has precipitated infrastructure disputes. Thematic and content analysis of primary legal documents, official regulatory reports, and verified media documentation reveals that the Act contains significant institutional voids. Specifically, the findings indicate that the lack of clearly delineated jurisdictional boundaries between federal and state regulators created a fertile ground for overlapping mandates and institutional rivalry between the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) and the Imo State Electricity Regulatory Commission (ISERC). Furthermore, the study establishes that the Act’s failure to provide structured guidelines on market entry sequencing, asset transfer, and pre-construction certification directly contributed to chaotic investment, confrontational infrastructure development, and the coercive seizure of assets. The study concludes that the Imo State crisis is a direct manifestation of these legislative deficiencies, demonstrating that decentralization without meticulous legal precision can exacerbate, rather than resolve, sectoral conflicts. The study therefore recommends targeted amendments to the Electricity Act 2023 to clarify jurisdictional boundaries and the issuance of a comprehensive regulatory order to establish a transparent and conflict-sensitive investor-entry framework, which are essential preconditions for achieving the Act’s stated goals of a stable, competitive, and investment-driven electricity market in Nigeria.
Babajide et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: