NPA: Challenges NERDC Textbook Ranking Policy Legality, Fees

• The Nigerian Publishers Association (NPA) has filed a lawsuit against the Nigerian Educational Research and Development Council (NERDC) over its new textbook ranking policy.
• The suit challenges NERDC's requirement for previously approved textbooks to undergo a second compulsory ranking and the associated fees.
• NPA is asking the Federal High Court in Ibadan to determine if NERDC's new regulations are legally effective without presidential approval and gazette publication.
• Publishers who fail to participate in the ranking exercise risk having their previously approved textbooks excluded from classroom use.
• NERDC had previously reduced assessment and ranking fees and announced refund measures in response to industry concerns.

This case is poised to clarify the extent of a regulatory body's statutory authority in Nigeria, particularly concerning the imposition of new requirements and fees on previously approved products.

The Nigerian Publishers Association (NPA) has initiated legal proceedings against the Nigerian Educational Research and Development Council (NERDC), seeking to halt the implementation of its controversial new textbook ranking policy. The lawsuit, filed at the Federal High Court in Ibadan under case number FHC/IB/CS/117/26, names the President, NERDC, the Minister of Education, and the Attorney-General of the Federation as defendants. This legal action underscores a significant dispute over regulatory authority and the financial burden placed on the publishing industry.

At the heart of the NPA's challenge is the requirement that textbooks already assessed, approved, and certified for use must undergo a *second* compulsory ranking exercise. Publishers are contesting this mandate, arguing that it is an unnecessary duplication of effort and an overreach of NERDC's powers. The association is also challenging the compulsory fee attached to this new ranking process, which it views as an additional and unwarranted financial imposition on its members. The NPA asserts that the central question for the court is whether NERDC possesses the statutory authority to impose such a condition on publishers.

The implications for publishers who do not comply with the new policy are severe. The NPA has highlighted that textbooks previously approved for classroom use risk being excluded if they fail to participate in this new ranking exercise. This potential exclusion poses a significant threat to the continued distribution, procurement, and sale of established educational materials, directly impacting both publishers and the wider educational system. The lawsuit aims to clarify the legality of this requirement and protect publishers from what they perceive as an arbitrary regulatory burden.

A key aspect of the NPA's lawsuit delves into the procedural legality of the NERDC's new regulations. The association is asking the court to determine whether regulations introduced under the NERDC Act can legally take effect without first obtaining the required presidential approval and subsequent publication in the Federal Gazette. This challenge directly questions the process through which the new policy was introduced, suggesting a potential bypass of established legal and administrative protocols for regulatory implementation.

NERDC, for its part, introduced the ranking framework with the stated objective of enhancing the quality of textbooks and ensuring that instructional materials used in schools meet prescribed standards and align with the national curriculum. This move was framed as an effort to strengthen educational content. However, the policy has generated considerable concern within the publishing industry, particularly regarding the additional financial strain it places on publishers and the broader implications of making ranking a prerequisite for the continued use of previously approved educational resources.

In response to the initial outcry from publishers, NERDC did implement some adjustments to its fee structure. The council reduced the textbook assessment fee from N2,000 to N1,500 per page, and the ranking fee for each title was lowered from N1 million to N750,000. Furthermore, NERDC announced measures to provide refunds for publishers who had already paid the higher assessment rates. Despite these concessions, the Nigerian Publishers Association maintains that the fundamental legality and statutory authority behind the policy remain unresolved, necessitating judicial intervention.

The legal challenge brought by the Nigerian Publishers Association against the NERDC's textbook ranking policy carries significant weight, as it seeks a judicial determination on the legality of the ranking requirement itself, the compulsory nature of participation, and the fees associated with the process. This case is poised to clarify the extent of a regulatory body's statutory authority in Nigeria, particularly concerning the imposition of new requirements and fees on previously approved products. It will also address the critical question of whether new regulations must secure presidential approval and be published in the Federal Gazette to be legally binding.

This lawsuit, centered on the NPA challenges NERDC textbook ranking policy, could establish a crucial precedent for how regulatory bodies operate and introduce new policies across various sectors in Nigeria. For educational publishers and other regulated entities, the outcome will define the boundaries of regulatory power and the avenues available for challenging perceived overreach. While pursuing legal recourse, the NPA has emphasized that its court action does not preclude further dialogue with the Federal Government. The association remains committed to fostering meaningful discussions and collaborating with stakeholders to establish a textbook approval system that is lawful, transparent, and ultimately serves the best interests of learners, teachers, and the entire publishing industry.

Lawyers advising educational publishers and other regulated entities should closely monitor this case, as it will determine the extent of a regulatory body's statutory authority to impose new requirements and fees, particularly concerning previously approved products and the necessity of presidential approval and gazette publication for new regulations. This could set a precedent for challenging regulatory overreach in Nigeria.

Source: Original reporting via local correspondent.