South African business group Sakeliga has asked the Pretoria High Court to review the rule requiring network operators and internet service providers to be at least 30% owned by historically disadvantaged groups before they can hold a telecoms licence. The application — reported on 11 November by thecondia, a South African business-focused news outlet — names the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA) and its chairperson, Mothibi Ramusi, as respondents, with Communications Minister Solly Malatsi cited as the executive member responsible for the Electronic Communications Act (ECA), the statute under which the licensing regime sits.
The decision Sakeliga wants undone is the regulator’s rather than the regulation itself: ICASA’s rejection, on 13 May 2026, of a policy directive from Malatsi that would have altered broad-based black economic empowerment (B-BBEE) ownership regulations for telecoms licences. The group asks the court to review that refusal, set it aside, and declare it invalid and inconsistent with the Constitution. Its worked example is SpaceX, which on thecondia’s account has refused to launch Starlink’s consumer service in South Africa unless it can do so without selling a 30% stake in its local entity.
What Sakeliga is asking for
Notably, the application does not ask for the 30% requirement to be struck down. Instead the group seeks an order compelling the state to make equity-equivalent alternatives available — mechanisms that let a licensee discharge empowerment obligations without selling shares. Sakeliga is blunt about the limits of its own remedy, which in words quoted by thecondia would “replace a racial quota with a racial handicap”: objectionable in the group’s view, but an improvement on the rule as it stands.
Who the 30% rule binds
On the reading set out in the application, the requirement applies to internet access, broadcasting and network infrastructure licences alike, and bites at three separate moments:
- when a licence is first obtained
- when it is renewed
- when it is transferred
That renewal-and-transfer reach is what makes the case wider than a single launch, and the complaint is not confined to foreign applicants: per thecondia, Sakeliga argues that local companies falling short of the threshold are caught by the same bar, which leaves an existing licensee below the line exposed at its next renewal. The sharper line in the filing is between applicants for whom the quota is expensive and those for whom it is impossible — some parent companies, the group contends, cannot sell equity in a local subsidiary at all under their global arrangements. That distinction, on our reading, explains why the remedy sought is an alternative route rather than a lower number: a smaller quota would still be unreachable for a parent structurally barred from diluting, whereas an equity-equivalent programme turns an absolute bar into a price.
Why it matters for Starlink availability in South Africa
South Africa is one of the larger African markets with no Starlink consumer offering, and the obstacle described here is a licence condition rather than coverage or capacity. Starlink availability already extends to neighbouring Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Botswana and Eswatini, each shown on Starlink’s own availability map with residential service live and a monthly fee and hardware cost attached; there is no South African Starlink price to quote because there is no plan to buy. For readers in the country, nothing changes today.
What the filing adds to the wider picture is our assessment rather than the applicant’s. SpaceX has shown it will move on commercial terms — the dynamic pricing it has begun rolling out is one example, and it is pushing harder into newer markets with Starlink News having reported revenue per user slipping as growth shifts to newer markets. The term it has not moved on is ownership and control of the local entity, the same ground as in India, where the argument has turned on who controls the network rather than on hardware. An ownership condition is therefore the one kind the company has no record of pricing its way past — which is why the South African version of the dispute has ended up before a judge instead of in a negotiation with the regulator.
What is not verified
This account rests on a single secondary report. Starlink News has not seen the application papers or ICASA’s 13 May 2026 decision, and could locate neither document in public form; no other outlet had carried the filing at the time of writing. The report also contains no statement from ICASA, Ramusi, Malatsi or SpaceX, and no public response from any of the four could be found. Every characterisation of Sakeliga’s case above therefore comes from thecondia, not from the parties.
Frequently Asked Questions
Would equity-equivalent alternatives be cheaper for SpaceX than selling a 30% stake?
No — not on Sakeliga’s own account. thecondia reports the group accepting that companies which use the alternatives would still face steeper costs than those that meet the 30% ownership target outright.
Did Minister Malatsi’s policy directive change the ownership rules by itself?
No. A policy directive asks the regulator to act on it; it does not amend regulations on its own. Once ICASA declined to follow it, the existing B-BBEE ownership regulations stayed in force unchanged.
Is there a timetable for the case or for a Starlink launch in South Africa?
No. The report carries no date for the Pretoria High Court to hear the application, no Starlink launch date, and no indication of whether a successful review would be followed by a South African licence application from SpaceX.
Does the case affect Starlink’s position in other African countries?
No. The application concerns ICASA’s licensing rules and the South African Electronic Communications Act, and thecondia’s report says nothing about licensing elsewhere on the continent, so nothing in it alters Starlink’s status in other African markets.
![Using Your Own Router with Starlink: Bypass Mode [2026]](https://starlink-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/using-your-own-router-with-starlink-bypass-mode-20-f6c09f95-120x86.png)
