The Certified Computer Manufacturers of Nigeria (CCMON) has issued a stark warning over the circulation of counterfeit computers in government projects, describing the trend as a fundamental threat to Nigeria’s tech credibility and the sustainability of indigenous innovation.
In a formal petition addressed to the National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA), CCMON condemned the deployment of counterfeit versions of SpeedStar Computers, an indigenous brand owned by Beta Computers, by contractors engaged on government-backed ICT projects.
The group described the incident as an act of economic sabotage, which undermines the federal government’s Renewed Hope Agenda and its stated commitment to empowering local industries.
Signed by CCMON president Adenike Abudu and secretary general Tosin Ilesanmi, the letter criticised the continued use of substandard, misrepresented technologies in public procurement.
“The counterfeiting of SpeedStar PCs is not just a breach of trademark, it is a national embarrassment and a failure of enforcement mechanisms in the public sector,” the letter notes.
While this is not the first time complaints have been raised about fake or substandard ICT equipment in federal projects, CCMON says the SpeedStar case marks a turning point due to the existence of credible, actionable evidence.
According to the group, this offers a rare opportunity to set a legal and policy precedent that will reinforce the credibility of Nigeria’s local content strategy in the ICT sector.
The letter also emphasised that such initiatives must be matched with strict oversight and accountability.
“If local Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) are sidelined or sabotaged within the very framework meant to empower them, the entire policy collapses under its contradictions,” the association warned.
Similar challenges have been recorded in countries like India and Brazil, where efforts to promote indigenous technology have been undermined by weak enforcement. In India, contractors under the “Make in India” initiative were exposed for branding imported hardware as locally made, while in Brazil, suppliers relabelled foreign components to exploit tax incentives meant for local manufacturers.
Both cases triggered policy reviews and reinforced the need for stricter oversight, paralleling Nigeria’s own struggle to protect its local tech ecosystem from sabotage and policy abuse.
Share