STARLINK VERSUS BBBEE @KASIBC_NEWS
*Starlink, Equity Equivalents, and the South African Policy Labyrinth*
by Stan Itshegetseng
Member, Vuyani Mabaxa Branch (Ward 27, Zone 10) | NEC Member, Progressive Professionals Forum (PPF)
(Writing in my personal capacity)
*What is Starlink?*
Starlink is a satellite internet service launched by Elon Musk’s SpaceX. It is built on a constellation of low-Earth orbit satellites that deliver high—speed broadband worldwide, particularly to remote and underserved areas. In technical terms, Starlink bypasses traditional terrestrial infrastructure like fiber optics or mobile towers and instead beams internet from orbit directly to user terminals.
In a South African context, this is game-changing:
• It expands internet access to rural schools, clinics, and farming communities;
• Empowers black-owned SMMEs with reliable broadband;
• Accelerates e-health and e-learning services;
• Supports national imperatives under the National Development Plan (NDP) 2030 for inclusive digital transformation.
*B-BBEE Equity Equivalents: A Tool, Not a Loophole*
The Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment Act 53 of 2003, and more specifically Statement 103 of the B-BBEE Codes of Good Practice (published under Section 9(1) of the Act), makes provision for Equity Equivalent Programmes (EEPs). These are alternative ownership compliance mechanisms specifically designed for wholly foreign-owned multinationals.
The logic is simple: instead of selling equity stakes, companies can earn full ownership scorecard points by investing in initiatives that benefit black South Africans, such as:
• Skills development programmes;
• Enterprise and supplier development;
• Critical infrastructure investments.
This mechanism was not invented by Minister Solly Malatsi. It is a long-standing regulatory tool approved and used by ANC-led administrations through the Department of Trade, Industry, and Competition (DTIC).
Examples include:
• IBM: R700 million over 10 years in ICT training and supplier development (approved 2015);
• Amazon: R365 million focused on creating 100% black-owned tech SMMEs (approved 2019);
• Microsoft: R708 million combined, focusing on enterprise development and the “APP Factory” model (approved 2011 & 2020).
(Ref: DTIC EEIP Register, 2025)
So, when the media suggests that Malatsi is “breaking new ground,” they are either uninformed or complicit in public misinformation. As correctly stated in recent civic forums:
“The Equity Equivalent in BBBEE is not new… the regulation was always there… the Minister is not introducing new policies.”
*But There’s a Catch: Licensing ≠ Ownership Compliance*
Where the Minister is misleading the public—intentionally or not—is in conflating B-BBEE ownership compliance with telecommunications licensing law.
According to Section 9(2)(b) of the Electronic Communications Act 36 of 2005, any applicant for an individual electronic communications license (such as one required by Starlink) must have:
_*“a minimum of 30% ownership by persons from historically disadvantaged groups.”*_
This ownership requirement is not just a BEE scorecard item—it is a legal licensing threshold, embedded in national telecommunications law, designed to transform the sector structurally, not cosmetically.
Thus, while Starlink may qualify for an EEP under the B-BBEE Act, this does not exempt it from the 30% HDG ownership requirement under the ECA. The two operate in separate but interrelated legal regimes.
*The Legal Minefield: What Malatsi is Attempting*
By suggesting that Starlink might operate in South Africa without meeting the 30% HDG ownership requirement—through an EEP—the Minister is effectively attempting to recast licensing law through policy directive.
That is not within his powers. *Only Parliament can amend the ECA.* Only courts can resolve interpretive contradictions between the ECA and B-BBEE frameworks.
This is why legal scholars warn:
_*“The Minister is seeking to play the role of a court… his policy directive is trying to override what the ECA says, and a legal battle is inevitable.”*_
If left unchallenged, this sets a dangerous precedent—where executive statements are used to bypass the legislative and constitutional process.
*Parks Tau: The Strategist of Silence*
While public attention was drawn to the press-ready performance of Minister Malatsi, Minister Parks Tau operated with the strategic gravitas of a statesman. He was not in the room for photo ops—he was there as a quiet force of diplomatic and trade policy consolidation, ensuring:
• That any foreign investment aligns with South Africa’s Industrial Policy Action Plan (IPAP);
• That digital sovereignty and transformation are protected through the ICT Sector Code;
• That South Africa negotiates not just access, but reciprocal benefit.
Tau was instrumental in crafting the Black Industrialists Programme, the Automotive Investment Fund, and now, behind the scenes, shaping how multinationals like Starlink can enter South Africa on just terms—not exploitative ones.
His leadership represents a return to technocratic statecraft, where political quietness is not weakness but surgical discipline. He is, as I’ve said, the silent killer of neoliberal appeasement, and with him, South Africa’s digital future is in the safest hands possible.
*Conclusion: Law Must Lead, Not PR*
* Starlink has immense potential to empower South Africans.
* It should be welcomed—but on our terms, in accordance with:
• The B-BBEE Act,
• The Electronic Communications Act 36 of 2005,
• The ICT Sector Code (2016), and
• The National Development Plan (NDP).
If Starlink seeks a path through the Equity Equivalent Programme, that is valid—but it cannot be used to evade licensing conditions. Otherwise, it is not transformation; it is recolonization by satellite.
South Africa’s regulatory state must remain supreme—not subdued by billionaires in orbit.
Let Starlink come. But let it land on constitutional and ethical ground.
And as revolutionaries of thought, policy, and patriotism, we say:
Let the law speak. Let Parks Tau lead. Let the people benefit.
