A Kenyan High Court judge has ruled that Safaricom can participate in a legal dispute over telecom spectrum charges. The ruling, by Justice John Anuro, overturns a decision by the Communications and Multimedia Appeals Tribunal that had previously shut Safaricom out. The dispute centers on new annual fees for radio airwaves that carry phone calls and mobile internet, introduced by the Communications Authority of Kenya (CA) in March 2025.
The new fee structure calculates charges based on the amount of spectrum assigned to each operator, with separate prices for each frequency band. This replaces the old system, where operators paid according to the number of transmitters in their network. The CA claims the update reflects inflation, technological changes, and the need for efficient spectrum use, aiming to encourage investment and connectivity.
Jamii Telecommunications Limited, a smaller operator, challenged the new schedule, arguing it favors larger companies and is discriminatory, uncompetitive, and unfair. The tribunal suspended the new fee schedule on April 24, 2025, and it has remained suspended since. Safaricom had sought to join the case as an interested party, citing the impact on its regulatory obligations, costs, and business plans.
The tribunal initially rejected Safaricom's bid, stating that the company had not explained the harm it would suffer if left out. The CA also opposed Safaricom's participation, warning that it could prejudice the regulator's response. However, Justice Anuro ruled that the tribunal had applied the legal test too rigidly, citing Safaricom's affidavit, which stated that the case could affect its regulatory obligations and financial outlay.
The judge rejected the idea that Safaricom had to take a side in the dispute, stating that an interested party can support some arguments, oppose others, or simply explain its position. He also noted that Safaricom's offer of industry expertise was not a reason to refuse its participation. The company's main argument was that it is subject to the fee system being challenged.
Safaricom's participation in the case comes with conditions, including that it must stick to the issues already raised by Jamii. The company cannot bring new claims, add grounds of appeal, or take control of the case. The tribunal is expected to set deadlines for Safaricom's affidavit and submissions, and the other parties will have a chance to respond.
In the year to March, Safaricom paid KES 16.3 billion in license fees to the CA, up from KES 14.6 billion the previous year. The ruling only determines who can participate in the case, and the main question of whether the new fee structure is fair and was properly introduced remains before the tribunal. A draft market review by the CA and the ICT Authority notes that spectrum fees are a significant operating cost and that the pricing changes are being litigated.
Key points
- The Kenyan High Court has allowed Safaricom to join a legal dispute over telecom spectrum charges, introduced by the Communications Authority of Kenya (CA) in March 2025.
- The new fee structure calculates charges based on the amount of spectrum assigned to each operator, replacing the old system that charged based on the number of transmitters.
- The dispute centers on whether the new fee structure is fair and was properly introduced, with Jamii Telecommunications Limited arguing that it favors larger companies and is discriminatory.
