Justice John Anuro allowed Safaricom to join the legal dispute in which Jamii Telecommunications Limited is challenging the Communications Authority of Kenya’s revised 2025 spectrum-fee schedule.
The revised fees, suspended since April 24, 2025 after the Communications and Multimedia Appeals Tribunal halted implementation, concern charges for radio frequencies used for mobile calls and internet data, and replace a transmitter-based calculation with band-based charges based on the amount of spectrum assigned to each operator.
The Communications Authority says the changes reflect inflation, technological developments, efficient spectrum use and the need to support investment and connectivity, while Jamii argues the pricing structure favours larger operators, describing it as discriminatory, uncompetitive, unfair, unsustainable and unreasonable and saying public participation was superficial.
Safaricom sought to join because the outcome could affect its regulatory obligations, financial outlay, business planning and competitive position, and it offered to provide technical and economic context on spectrum pricing and its impact on competition and service delivery.
The tribunal initially rejected Safaricom’s application, finding it had not adequately explained prejudice and had not clarified whether it supported or opposed Jamii’s appeal; Safaricom appealed to the High Court and the Communications Authority opposed entry, arguing the company had not attached material setting out its case and that admission could prejudice the regulator.
Justice Anuro ruled that the tribunal had applied the legal test too rigidly, noting Safaricom’s affidavit stated the appeal could affect its regulatory obligations, financial outlay, business planning and competitive position, which satisfied the prejudice requirement.
The judge also rejected the view that Safaricom must declare its stance on Jamii’s appeal before joining, stating an interested party may support some arguments, oppose others or focus on how the outcome affects its own position.
The High Court limited Safaricom’s role, ordering it to confine submissions to issues already raised by Jamii and prohibiting it from introducing new claims, grounds of appeal or remedies, or taking control of the case, and the tribunal is expected to set timelines for Safaricom’s affidavit and submissions.
The underlying dispute remains Jamii’s challenge to the revised fee framework; the Communications Authority notified licence holders on March 10, 2025 that the revised annual fees would take effect on July 1, 2025, and Jamii contends the structure advantages dominant market players and undermines competition.
A draft market review by the Communications Authority and ICT Authority notes that spectrum fees constitute a significant operating cost and warns that the new structure could raise fees for operators with smaller networks, while stressing pricing should not exclude smaller rivals.
Safaricom’s licence-fee expenditure was KSh16.3 billion for the year ended March, up from KSh14.6 billion the previous year, covering licence fees but not the specific spectrum charges under dispute, and the company also received a 25-year operating licence under Kenya’s Unified Licensing Framework in May 2026.
Both Safaricom and Jamii operate in Kenya’s fixed broadband market, which reached 2.84 million connections to June 2026, including 1.57 million fibre connections, with the two firms identified as major providers.
