Digital Economy Bill, Big Powers, Bigger Disputes: Where Will The Fights Go?
What Nigeria’s digital economy law means for SLAs, platform terms and who carries the risk when systems fail
The National Digital Economy and e-Governance Bill is moving through the National Assembly and is expected to reach the President for aspplqsent. Recent reports from the National Assembly and the Nigeria Labour and Trade Unions Federation note that the Bill is due to be transmitted to President Bola Tinubu and is seen as a key plank of the “Renewed Hope” digital agenda. NALTF+1
The Bill gives regulators more power and pushes government and businesses further into the digital space. It sets rules for online commerce, platforms, electronic records, trust services and artificial intelligence, and is designed to create a “unified legal and institutional framework” for Nigeria’s digital economy and e-governance. Channels Television+3Ministry of Communication+3TechCabal+3 It also places the National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA) at the centre of digital policy, with power to issue rules, run regulatory sandboxes and sanction non-compliance. NITDA+3TechCabal+3Technology Times+3
What the Bill does not do is say, clearly, where people should go when things break. Regulators will act. Courts will remain open. Consumer protection law will still apply. But the big fights between platforms, vendors, government bodies and users will often sit inside private contracts.
At NexusADR, we look at this Bill with one question in mind: where will the disputes go, and who is ready to handle them. Our view is simple. Regulators and courts will keep their central role, but many digital economy disputes will be contractual in nature and better handled in well-designed arbitration and other structured dispute processes.
1. What the Bill actually does, in simple terms
Stripped to its core, the National Digital Economy and e-Governance Bill tries to do three main things.
First, it sets basic rules for how people and businesses use digital tools in Nigeria. The draft text covers duties for online suppliers and platforms, minimum information that must be given to consumers, and clearer recognition of electronic records and signatures than older laws. Ministry of Communication+1
Second, it builds a shared digital backbone for government. Ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs) are pushed to digitise services, use common platforms, and sign service level agreements (SLAs) with technology providers that spell out performance levels, security, data handling and remedies for non-performance. Ministry of Communication+2Technology Times+2
Third, it starts to regulate newer tools such as artificial intelligence and trust services. Policy work around the Bill links it to Nigeria’s National AI Strategy and to NITDA’s role in setting rules for AI, digital identity and cybersecurity standards, including through regulatory sandboxes for testing new technologies. DCO+3FCCPC+3Technology Times+3
On paper, this mix makes sense. Nigeria wants a safer, better organised digital space, and it wants public services that work online. In reality, every new duty, standard and enforcement power is also a new place where conflict can arise when things go wrong.
2. The fault lines: where disputes are likely to arise
The Bill does not talk much about disputes, but it is not hard to see where tension will build once it is in force.
a) Consumers vs suppliers and platforms
The first set of disputes will sit between consumers, suppliers and platforms.
The Bill expects online suppliers to give accurate information about themselves, their goods and their complaint channels, and ties consumer disputes back to the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act (FCCPA). Ministry of Communication+1 The FCCPA is the main consumer protection statute in Nigeria. It establishes the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) and a Competition and Consumer Protection Tribunal, with powers to tackle unfair practices and protect consumer welfare. Banwo & Ighodalo+4PLACNG+4FCCPC+4
Under the Act, consumers can bring complaints to suppliers, sector regulators or the FCCPC. The FCCPC may investigate, issue compliance notices, mediate, and enter consent orders that can be registered and enforced by a court. Mondaq+1
If you run an online store, app or marketplace, this is not a theory problem. Every late delivery, fake listing or messy refund is now more likely to end up as a formal complaint, not just a social media rant. On the surface, the dispute may look like “customer vs seller”. In the background, there will often be a second argument: platform vs merchant over who should carry the loss.
b) Government vs tech vendors
The second pressure point sits in government service contracts.
The Bill expects MDAs to sign SLAs that cover uptime, performance, cybersecurity and data handling, and to include remedies for non-performance. Ministry of Communication+2Technology Times+2 That is good practice, but it also exposes gaps in capacity.
If you work in an ICT unit or procurement team in an MDA, this Bill turns vague “ICT projects” into legal commitments that can go very wrong, very publicly, if the terms are weak. Many agencies are still learning how to buy and manage complex digital systems, while vendors often rely on foreign templates that do not fit Nigerian law or public duties.
When an e-governance project fails, a portal is down during a crucial filing window, or a database is compromised, the political and financial stakes are high. Disputes then arise over delay, change of scope, security duties, service credits, penalties and termination. Studies on Nigeria’s justice system and commercial enforcement repeatedly point to court congestion and poor case flow management as reasons why complex disputes take years to resolve. Chaman Law Firm+4ResearchGate+4Punuka+4
c) Platforms vs merchants and other partners
A third group of disputes will arise inside the business chain that keeps the digital economy running.
The Bill and commentary around it describe how NITDA’s expanded powers can reach platforms and digital service providers, while industry groups have warned about overlap between NITDA’s broad mandate and the work of other regulators such as the Nigerian Communications Commission. TheCable+3TechCabal+3INCLUDE Platform+3 In practice, platforms will have stronger duties to know their merchants and, in some cases, may share responsibility for non-compliant suppliers.
Behind the scenes sit payment processors, logistics companies, cloud providers and foreign software vendors. When a regulator fines a platform or a court finds it liable, the platform will not want to carry the full cost. It will turn to its contracts and seek indemnity from merchants, payment partners, logistics firms or cloud providers. These disputes are B2B in nature, often cross-border, and driven by dense contracts that can quickly overwhelm the normal court process.
d) AI systems, due process and harm
A fourth, newer category involves artificial intelligence.
Nigeria’s National AI Strategy and policy discussions around the Bill stress the need for responsible AI, transparency and access to redress, and identify NITDA as a key body for AI governance. FCCPC+2INCLUDE Platform+2 In simple terms, AI system operators will be expected to provide ways for people to challenge automated decisions and to seek a remedy if they suffer material or moral harm, while regulators may investigate and issue orders, including compensation and penalties.
Think of an automated loan app that wrongly flags a whole group of customers as high-risk because the data feeding the model is flawed. People are denied credit, and no one can explain the decision in plain language. Who do they sue. The app developer, the bank that deployed it, the data broker in the background, or all three. The visible dispute may be an individual claim, but the core fight over responsibility will sit inside B2B and B2G contracts.
3. What the Bill does not do: the quiet gap on forums
For all its detail, the Bill does not create a special digital economy court or tribunal. It does not say that all disputes under it must go to one place. Instead, it strengthens NITDA and other regulators, keeps the FCCPA in place for consumer matters, and leaves ordinary courts to handle civil claims. Africa laws+4Ministry of Communication+4TechCabal+4
Industry bodies such as the Association of Licensed Telecom Operators of Nigeria (ALTON) have already raised concern about overlap and confusion between regulators, noting that the Bill gives NITDA broad powers that intersect with the statutory mandate of the Nigerian Communications Commission. TheCable+1 That debate is important, but it still does not answer a basic question for parties in dispute: who will hear our case, and how.
This silence on forums matters. Nigeria’s courts already face long delays and heavy case loads. Commentaries and empirical work on enforcement of contracts and administration of justice point to backlog, manual record-keeping and congestion as major challenges. Chaman Law Firm+4ResearchGate+4Punuka+4 Regulators are also not set up to settle every disagreement between private actors. Their job is to watch the system as a whole, protect the public and deal with serious or repeated breaches.
The real effect is that many digital economy disputes will be decided by whatever dispute clauses parties put, or fail to put, in their contracts. The Bill sets the duties and enforcement backdrop. The contracts decide who carries which risk, who pays when things go wrong, and which forum interprets the fine print.
4. Why arbitration fits many of these disputes
Arbitration will not solve every digital conflict. Consumer cases and core public law issues will still pass through regulators and the courts. But for many B2B and B2G disputes under this Bill, arbitration is a better fit than crowded court lists.
a) Complexity, speed and expertise
Digital disputes mix contract, regulation and technology. They involve logs, uptime records, digital signatures, timestamps and, at times, AI outputs. They are often time sensitive, especially when a platform suspension or system outage affects the core of a business or public service.
The Arbitration and Mediation Act 2023 gives Nigeria a more modern framework for arbitration and mediation, with an express aim of providing a “unified legal framework for the fair and efficient settlement of commercial disputes” and aligning practice with the New York Convention and other international standards. Afriwise+5White & Case LLP+5Lexology+5
Parties can choose arbitrators who understand both law and technology and can agree procedures that suit complex documents and expert evidence. Academic and practice work on arbitration in Nigeria also notes benefits such as party autonomy, privacy and reduced court congestion when arbitration is used well. Academic Journals+3Nigerian Journals Online+3Nigerian Journals Online+3
b) Contract chains and cross-border elements
Many services covered by the Bill sit on top of international chains. Cloud hosting, software licences, payment gateways and foreign parent companies are common.
Arbitration makes it easier to bring these actors into one process. Parties can agree the seat, rules and governing law in advance. Awards from arbitrations seated in New York Convention states are, in principle, easier to enforce abroad than domestic court judgments, something Nigerian commentators have highlighted in recent discussions of the 2023 Act and enforcement practice. Nigerian Journals Online+4White & Case LLP+4Alliance Law Firm+4 This matters where key assets or decision makers are outside Nigeria.
c) Living with regulators and consumer protection
It is also important to stay honest about limits. Regulatory powers under the Bill, and consumer rights under the FCCPA, cannot simply be pushed aside with an arbitration clause. The FCCPA gives the FCCPC and its Tribunal public powers that exist alongside any private contract. Trans African Legal+4FCCPC+4PLACNG+4 There will be cases where public law and consumer remedies must take priority, no matter what the contract says.
The realistic place for arbitration is the contractual layer: disputes between MDAs and vendors over SLAs, indemnity claims between platforms and merchants, and high-value AI deployment contracts. Regulators can still handle big-picture risks and public interest issues, while arbitration manages how contractual risk is shared among private and public actors.
5. What lawyers, businesses and public bodies should do now
If arbitration and structured dispute systems are going to help, parties need to plan for them at the drafting stage.
a) Review dispute clauses in digital contracts
Many digital contracts in Nigeria still rely on vague language about “amicable settlement” followed by “courts of competent jurisdiction”. Under this Bill, that approach is risky.
Parties should review their SLAs, platform terms and AI deployment agreements. Where it makes sense, they should insert clear steps: direct negotiation between named contacts, then mediation, then arbitration if the issue is still unresolved. The arbitration clause should state the seat, rules, number of arbitrators and how they will be chosen, and it should avoid wording that could be read as cutting off consumer or public rights that cannot be waived, in line with the public policy limits recognised in the Arbitration and Mediation Act and wider Nigerian law. Nigerian Journals Online+3White & Case LLP+3IBA+3
b) Build dispute planning into govtech projects
For public bodies and their vendors, dispute planning should sit inside project design, not as boilerplate at the end.
Before signing an SLA, the parties should agree how they will respond to outages, security incidents or serious delay. They should decide who keeps which records, how quickly incidents are reported, and when a problem moves from day-to-day management into a formal dispute under the contract. Practical commentaries on e-governance in Nigeria stress that poor planning, weak contracts and unclear responsibilities are major reasons why digital public projects stall or fail. INCLUDE Platform+1
This kind of planning makes it less likely that a problem will spiral into a breakdown of a key public service.
c) Design complaint and online resolution systems that work
The Bill expects suppliers and platforms to provide fair and accessible complaint paths. A token email address is not enough.
Businesses should build complaint systems that are easy to find and easy to use, with clear timelines and simple language. They can link these to online tools that help settle small claims quickly. Experience from consumer protection authorities in Nigeria and elsewhere shows that simple, prompt complaint handling can resolve a large share of disputes before they escalate to regulators or courts. Mondaq+2Trans African Legal+2 For the smaller number of cases that involve large sums or serious technical questions, contracts can then direct the parties into mediation or arbitration.
6. Closing: claiming the digital disputes space
The National Digital Economy and e-Governance Bill is not only about technology and governance. It also reshapes how conflict will arise in Nigeria’s digital space. Policymakers and commentators already describe it as a “critical enabler” of digital transformation and a law that will “redefine how government operates and how citizens access services”. Channels Television+2VON+2
It creates duties, rights and enforcement tools, but leaves forum design largely to existing laws and to private contracts. If lawyers, businesses and public bodies treat dispute clauses as an afterthought, many conflicts will slip into slow court processes and improvised fixes. If they plan ahead, they can guide the hardest cases into procedures that match the complexity and urgency of digital disputes.
At NexusADR, this is the space we care about: not only the policy debate, but the concrete question of where the fights will go and how to resolve them in a way that is fair, efficient and grounded in both law and technical reality.
Abbreviations and meanings
ADR – Alternative Dispute Resolution
Ways of settling disputes outside the regular courts, such as mediation and arbitration.
AI – Artificial Intelligence
Computer systems that perform tasks that normally need human intelligence, such as pattern recognition, predictions or automated decisions.
B2B – Business to Business
Deals and contracts between two or more companies, not directly with individual consumers.
B2G – Business to Government
Deals and contracts between a company and a government body.
FCCPA – Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act
Nigeria’s main consumer protection law. It sets rules on fair treatment of consumers and creates the consumer protection system.
FCCPC – Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission
The agency that enforces the FCCPA and handles many consumer complaints.
MDA – Ministry, Department or Agency
A public body or government office at federal or state level.
NCC – Nigerian Communications Commission
The regulator for the telecoms sector in Nigeria.
NITDA – National Information Technology Development Agency
The government agency that leads on information technology policy and, under the Bill, plays a central role in digital economy and e-governance issues.
SLA – Service Level Agreement
The part of a contract that sets out service standards (for example, uptime, response times and security) and what happens if the provider fails to meet them.
About NexusADR LLP
NexusADR LLP is a disputes and advisory firm focused on arbitration and complex commercial conflicts in and around Nigeria. The firm works on domestic and international arbitration, cross-border dispute resolution, and contract disputes that involve both private parties and public bodies.
NexusADR has a growing focus on climate and ESG disputes, including issues linked to energy projects, climate policy, and sustainability commitments in commercial contracts. The firm also handles technology law disputes and data protection matters, especially where digital platforms, online services, and public digital projects intersect with Nigerian and international standards.
Across these areas, the team acts as counsel, tribunal secretary, and arbitrator in selected cases, and supports clients in drafting dispute clauses, service level agreements, and risk-aware contracts. Through its case work, writing, and trainings, NexusADR aims to help clients think more clearly about how disputes can arise, ho
w to manage them early, and how to use arbitration and other dispute processes in a practical way.
