Starlink’s South African future faces new court challenge over BEE rules
· The South African
The prospect of Starlink in South Africa has entered a new legal phase after business organisation Sakeliga challenged the telecommunications regulator’s interpretation of black economic empowerment (BEE) ownership rules.
Visit een-wit.pl for more information.
Sakeliga filed papers in the Pretoria High Court on 9 November 2026, contesting the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa’s (ICASA) insistence on a 30% ownership requirement for companies seeking individual telecommunications licences.
The application adds a legal dimension to a dispute that has delayed the satellite internet provider’s local launch, despite government efforts to find a solution.
Why Sakeliga is challenging ICASA
The dispute centres on section 9(2)(b) of the Electronic Communications Act, which refers to a minimum 30% ownership by historically disadvantaged groups, alongside wording allowing “such other conditions”.
Sakeliga argues that the wording permits ICASA to recognise other ways of meeting empowerment requirements, rather than treating the ownership threshold as compulsory in every case.
In a statement released on 11 November, the organisation said its application seeks to set aside ICASA’s decision of 13 May 2026. Alternatively, it wants the relevant provision declared unconstitutional if the court accepts the regulator’s interpretation.
What the regulator and minister say
Communications and Digital Technologies Minister Solly Malatsi issued a policy direction in December 2025 calling on ICASA to consider aligning its licensing rules with the ICT Sector Code.
That could create a route for equity-equivalent investment programmes, allowing qualifying multinationals to contribute through approved investment and development initiatives instead of transferring local shareholding.
However, in its 13 May statement, ICASA maintained that the existing law requires at least 30% ownership by historically disadvantaged groups. It said fully recognising equity-equivalent programmes would require Parliament to amend the Act.
The disagreement follows an extended debate over changes to BEE requirements, with supporters of alternative arrangements arguing they could attract investment without abandoning transformation objectives.
Does the case mean Starlink can launch?
No. Starlink has not secured the South African licences required to sell its satellite internet service directly to local consumers. The latest court application does not grant permission to operate.
Even a ruling that ICASA has authority to consider equity-equivalent arrangements would not automatically compel the regulator to approve them or award Starlink a licence. The operator would still have to meet the applicable licensing requirements.
The dispute also reaches beyond Starlink. Its outcome could affect how domestic and international network operators meet empowerment conditions when applying for, renewing or transferring individual licences.
What happens next?
The court must first consider Sakeliga’s application and the respondents’ positions. No ruling or confirmed hearing date has been established in the sources reviewed as of 12 November 2026.
Until the legal and regulatory questions are settled, Starlink’s route into the South African market remains uncertain.
Should alternative empowerment investments count towards South Africa’s telecoms licensing rules?