The East African Community Competition Authority (EACCA) has moved to assert its merger control powers, unsettling the region’s competition regime by requiring fresh merger notifications that businesses believed had been eliminated.

 

The shift follows Kenya’s Safaricom plan to sell a stake to Vodacom, and means transactions previously cleared by the Comesa Competition and Consumer Commission (CCCC) may now face double filings.

Safaricom recently announced plans for Vodacom to acquire a further 20 percent stake, raising its shareholding from 35 percent to 55 percent. Had the deal been concluded three months earlier, the companies would have avoided at least $100,000 in additional fees, alongside compliance, travel and advisory costs.

Before November 2025, large cross-border transactions involving multinationals were notifiable only to the Comesa watchdog, the competition regulator for the 21-member bloc.

Legal authority was strengthened by a 2023 amendment passed by the East African Legislative Assembly. The Safaricom–Vodacom transaction will be the first merger formally reviewed by the EACCA.

Compliance layersCompetition lawyers warn the move will complicate and lengthen approvals for mergers and acquisitions across East Africa, increasing costs.“This adds another layer of compliance and just complicates and elongates the merger approval process,” said a lawyer advising on the deal, who requested anonymity.“The idea has always been to streamline processes so that you apply to just one regulator. That progress has now been reversed.”Since February 2023, major mergers in Comesa member states have been notifiable only to the CCCC, ending decades of double-notification requirements.

Under Comesa rules, mergers involving firms with combined annual turnover or assets of at least $50 million must be notified to the CCCC. Below that threshold, only national regulators apply.

The EACCA threshold is lower, at $35 million in combined turnover or assets, bringing more transactions under its jurisdiction and further complicating the regulatory landscape.

By contrast, when South Africa’s Pembani Remgro Infrastructure Fund acquired a 35 percent stake in Kenya’s Mawingu Networks, the deal was reviewed solely by the CCCC, with Kenya’s national regulator only notified.

A similar transaction today would require approval from both the CCCC and EACCA, raising fees, timelines and compliance costs, the very issues Comesa’s 2023 reforms sought to resolve.… but working on a solutionStellah Onyancha, acting registrar at the EACCA, said both regulators recognised the challenge.“We are alive to the fact that there is overlapping jurisdiction and that double notification is required for mergers, but we have started to work towards a solution,” Ms Onyancha said.“What we are looking towards is an amendment to allow referrals, where we agree with the CCCC on who is best placed to handle a particular case.”The EACCA maintains that its regime offers advantages. On its website, the authority says it provides a “one-stop shop” for cross-border transactions within the East African Community.

In practice, that benefit applies only to EAC states outside Comesa — Tanzania and South Sudan. For the other six EAC members, mandatory EACCA notification has reinstated double-filing.

Executives and advisers must also attend hearings in Arusha, Tanzania, and Lilongwe, Malawi, significantly raising transaction costs.“It is very tedious and discourages transactions,” the lawyer said. “There should be a way for regulators to work together to reduce this burden.”Willingness to cooperateThe two authorities have signalled willingness to cooperate. Last year, they signed a memorandum of understanding to collaborate on merger reviews and consumer protection cases.“In light of the overlapping jurisdiction, the parties aspire to review their legal frameworks to facilitate cooperation and ensure harmonisation,” the June agreement states.

The EAC’s move mirrors a wider trend among regional blocs. The Economic Community of West African States (Ecowas) launched its own regional competition authority in October 2024, while other blocs are pursuing similar models under the African Continental Free Trade Area.

Lawyers caution, however, that overlapping mandates and political interference could undermine effectiveness.“The flurry of new competition regulators may bring consistency,” said lawyers at South Africa’s Webber Wentzel law firm, “but there are concerns about overlapping jurisdictions, political tensions and high filing fees.”

© Copyright 2026 Nation Media Group. All Rights Reserved. Provided by SyndiGate Media Inc. (Syndigate.info).