In an escalation of the ongoing controversy regarding Starlink’s entry into Kenya’s internet space, a local advocacy group, Kituo cha Sheria (Legal Advice Centre), has filed a lawsuit against the country’s largest telco Safaricom, alongside industry regulators Communications Authority of Kenya (CA), and the Kenya Competition Authority.
This legal action challenges the barriers these entities might impose on Starlink, the satellite internet provider launched by Elon Musk’s satellite giant SpaceX.
The tension seemingly started in July 2023 when Starlink came to market with its high-speed satellite internet, with extensive coverage, particularly in remote areas. But it was just recently that Safaricom raised concerns about regulatory and security implications of granting independent licenses to such operators.
In a memo to the CA, Safaricom argued that such licenses could lead to inadequate regulatory oversight and potential security risks due to the cross-border nature of satellite services. They fundamentally operate without having a local physical presence.
Safaricom proposed satellite providers like Starlink be required to partner with local mobile network operators, which would allow existing telecoms license holders to manage the services. This, Safaricom argued, would ensure better control and compliance with local regulations while fostering innovation.
In response to concerns raised, the CA acknowledged the issues but has not yet committed to formal changes or consultations. As part of its mandate, the regulator stated that it would evaluate any problems raised by licensed network operators.
Kituo cha Sheria, led by Dr. Annette Mbogoh, deems the Safaricom alarm a competitive maneuver rather than genuine regulatory concerns. The group believes that Safaricom’s request for restriction of Starlink’s operations would unfairly limit Kenyans’ access to improved internet speeds and other more affordable services.
According to Dr. Mbogoh, Safaricom’s stance is motivated by its dominance in the market and its apprehension about competition from Starlink’s lower-priced offerings.
“The allegations in the first respondent’s letter dated July 5, 2024, remain unsubstantiated as it is a competitor and lacks independent and objective judgment. The first respondent is directly prejudiced by their market dominance and is likely to be apprehensive about the entry of any other big players into the market,” he said.
The group’s lawsuit demands that the court prevent Safaricom and the CA from hindering Starlink’s operations. Kituo cha Sheria argues that internet access is a fundamental socio-economic right and that the company’s demands are unconstitutional. The group also seeks a permanent injunction to prevent the CA from taking any action that might restrict ops.
The stakes are high. Starlink’s presence caused ripples in the market. Since making inroads, the platform’s subscriber base has quadrupled from just 405 users in July 2023 to over 4,850 by March 2024. Competitive pricing, including a recent reduction in equipment costs and rolling out a rental option, has pressured traditional ISPs, which charge significantly more.
Safaricom’s objections are not isolated. Similar things have worried other African countries, including Ghana, Senegal, and South Africa, where regulators are wary of licensing and operational models for satellite internet carriers. Such concerns underlie a debate on how best to regulate new technologies while balancing market competition and national security.
In contrast, Starlink’s expansion has been smoother in neighboring countries like Zimbabwe and Botswana, where the service has been well received and is seen as a valuable addition to the market.
As the legal battle unfolds, the outcome will likely have implications for the country’s internet landscape and regulatory framework. The case highlights the complex interplay between emerging technologies, market competition, and regulatory oversight, setting a potential regulatory precedent for satellite internet services.
