Telkom has told Icasa that the regulator’s black ownership rules for telecoms licensees go beyond what the Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment (B-BBEE) Act and the ICT sector code envisage, and that the resulting uncertainty has “potentially deterred much-needed investment” in South Africa’s networks.
The criticism is in Telkom’s submission to Icasa’s inquiry into new individual electronic communications network service (I-ECNS) licences, which the regulator has published on its website. Telkom, in which the government is the biggest shareholder, filed it in February, before Icasa told the minister in May that it needed a change in the law to give full effect to his empowerment policy direction. Details of its submission are being reported here for the first time.
Telkom, which is partially owned by the South African government, took aim at Icasa’s 2021 regulations on equity ownership by historically disadvantaged groups. They require individual licensees to maintain at least 30% ownership by historically disadvantaged groups for the life of their licences, and to have at least a level 4 B-BBEE contributor status. The 30% figure itself comes from the Electronic Communications Act. A separate 30% black ownership requirement in the regulations has been suspended by Icasa.
“The Equity Regulations introduce B-BBEE requirements that go beyond what is envisaged in the B-BBEE Act and the ICT sector codes,” Telkom said. It said the regulations set minimum equity requirements not contemplated in the ICT sector codes and “do not recognise other forms of ownership” or other ways of meeting empowerment objectives.
International best practice suggests that empowerment goals can be achieved through diverse mechanisms…
Telkom submission
The result, according to Telkom, has been “regulatory and policy uncertainty” that raises compliance costs and “in turn hinders competition in the market”.
Telkom said it was “in full support” of Icasa’s mandate to promote black economic empowerment. But it argued that “international best practice suggests that empowerment goals can be achieved through diverse mechanisms, including skills development, local supply chain participation, infrastructure investment and research and innovation funding”.
The same rules for Starlink
That is close to the case for equity-equivalent investment programmes (EEIPs), which allow multinationals to invest in skills, enterprise development or infrastructure instead of selling equity to black shareholders.
Communications minister Solly Malatsi issued a policy direction in December 2025 telling Icasa to “urgently consider” aligning its ownership rules with the B-BBEE Act and the ICT sector code. That reform is widely expected to open a path for Elon Musk’s Starlink, which has refused to give up 30% of its local business. Telkom cited the direction in its submission.
But Telkom also drew a line. Any satellite operator wanting to sell services directly to South African customers must hold I-ECNS and individual electronic communications service (I-ECS) licences, as well as spectrum licences, it said, and “the same licence terms and conditions, including social obligations, applicable to current licensees should apply equally” to newcomers. It named Starlink, as well as Amazon Leo, Spacesail, Eutelsat OneWeb and Avanti Communications.
Telkom wants any empowerment mechanisms to apply equally to all licensees, new and old. Treating them differently, it warned, would disadvantage companies that have devoted significant resources to complying with “South Africa’s (sometimes onerous) legal, policy and empowerment framework”, and “may ultimately result in the creation of a dual regulatory regime”.
The position echoes that of the Association of Comms & Technology (ACT), which represents Telkom, Vodacom, MTN, Cell C, Rain and Liquid Intelligent Technologies. The association has backed EEIPs while insisting on “regulatory parity” for any company using them. Telkom’s submission goes further by arguing that Icasa’s existing rules are themselves flawed.
In the same submission, Telkom argued that new I-ECNS licences would not improve competition, saying their marginal effect was likely to be “negligible”. Icasa took the opposite view in a discussion document on 30 October, provisionally concluding that would-be operators should be able to apply for licences directly. – (c) 2026 NewsCentral Media
