Kenya Insights

Tag: Kituo Cha Sheria

  • Stop Pretending to Be Good; You Are Immoral and Tainting Maraga’s Image,” Kenyans Tell Justus Munyithya

    Stop Pretending to Be Good; You Are Immoral and Tainting Maraga’s Image,” Kenyans Tell Justus Munyithya

    Kituo Cha Sheria Chairperson Justus Munyithya has come under fire for his alleged involvement in immoral activities, which are said to be contributing to the imminent collapse of the organization.

    Kenyans and legal stakeholders have criticized Munyithya for his hypocritical stance on police brutality while being accused of engaging in unethical behavior himself.

    Several individuals, including senior advocates, have condemned Munyithya for his role in the illegal dismissal of staff members and for practicing nepotism in the institution’s hiring processes.

    Munyithya, who was recently featured on Citizen TV alongside former Chief Justice David Maraga, has been accused of using his position to promote corruption within the organization.

    Furthermore, Munyithya has been accused of forcefully pushing for the appointment of John Mwariri, an allegedly unqualified individual, to the position of Chief Executive Officer within the organization to advance his own questionable agenda.

    It has been revealed that Munyithya has repeatedly disregarded the laws and regulations governing Kituo Cha Sheria, leading to a significant breakdown in governance and accountability.

    As the scandal continues to unfold, Kenyans are calling for Munyithya to be held accountable for his actions.

    They are also urging former Chief Justice David Maraga to distance himself from the disgraced chairperson. The future of Kituo Cha Sheria now hangs in the balance as the organization grapples with the fallout from Munyithya’s alleged misconduct.

  • ‪Starlink Faces Predatory Pricing Allegations In Kenya‬

    ‪Starlink Faces Predatory Pricing Allegations In Kenya‬

    Starlink’s entry into the Kenyan market has indeed stirred up quite a bit of controversy. Since its launch in July 2023, Starlink has been offering high-speed internet at competitive prices, which has led to concerns from local competitors like Safaricom.

    Jamii Telecommunications Limited, Kenya’s number two internet player behind Safaricom, has asked the communications regulator to investigate the alleged predatory pricing, a letter tabled in the High Court shows.

    They argue that Starlink’s pricing strategy is predatory, potentially driving out local providers by offering services at unsustainable low prices.

    The Communications Authority of Kenya (CA) is even seeking guidance from the United Nations to develop regulations for satellite internet services to ensure fair competition and protect local businesses.

    Predatory pricing involves a business setting a very low price in order to attract customers away from competitors, who will struggle to match the low price and may go bust.

    Currently, Starlink’s lowest package is retailing at Sh1,300 per month for 50 gigabytes (GB)—a price Jamii says only few local operators will be able to match when you factor in infrastructure rollout costs, operational costs and other costs associated with delivery of ICT services.

    The number of Kenyans using satellite internet has surged since Starlink entered the Kenyan market in July last year.

    In Kenya, Mr Musk priced Starlink at Sh1,300 per month for 50GB, versus $120 (Sh15,504) in the United States, and has lowered the cost of its access equipment from Sh89,000 to the current Sh45,500.

    Safaricom charges Sh5,000 for 47GB, but its package includes talk time of 2,500 minutes and 5, 000 SMSes.

    “The considerably low prices offered by Starlink, which are predatory in nature, will make it difficult for local internet service providers to compete on both price and service, and ultimately kill competition by undermining the efforts of local companies,” said Joshua Chepkwony, the Jamii chairman and CEO, in the September 3 letter to the CA.

    “Seeing that Starlink’s prices are commercially unsustainable in the long run, it is safe to say that its current strategy is driven towards mopping up subscriber numbers with the ultimate intention of upwardly reviewing the prices once it has achieved a critical mass.”

    Jamii alleged that the Starlink has, for instance, admitted on various media platforms that it loses more than 50 percent on every kit it produces in order to keep the prices low.

    The Jamii protest mirrors concerns in other markets where wealthy firms engaging in predatory pricing raise prices after gaining market share and vanquishing rival companies.

    Starlink has faced similar accusations in countries such as Indonesia and India, but the firm has argued that it maintains “absolute transparency” on pricing and performance around the world.

    In India, Reliance Jio and Bharti Airtel—the two main players— called for a level playing field as the country works out the norms for satellite communication spectrum.

    Jamii’s allegation of predatory pricing has effectively dragged the Competition Authority of Kenya (CAK)— antitrust authority— into the court battle over Starlink’s operation.

    The CAK has the mandate and powers to initiate an investigation on its own if it finds merit in complaints.

    The probe would hinge on whether Starlink is selling below its production costs and how it charges for similar products in other markets.

    “The Authority will seek to ascertain whether the dominant undertaking will be making losses as price is lower than average variable cost,” says CAK guidelines.

    “The Authority will also consider whether the conduct has led to the elimination of a significant and/or an efficient competitor and whether the dominant player can recoup its losses after it would have eliminated or weakened its competitor(s) from the market.”

    The CA revealed the predatory pricing claim in a court suit where legal lobby group Kituo Cha Sheria has sued it for responding to Safaricom on July 9 that it was reviewing the telecoms company’s concerns over Starlink.

    Safaricom in July urged regulators to consider requiring satellite internet providers such as Starlink to partner with local mobile network operators, saying its present dealings could allow illegal connections and harmful interference with mobile networks.

    It also cited security risks and lapses in regulatory oversight, due to the cross-border nature of satellite services.

    Starlink currently operates in over 100 countries globally, including 14 in Africa. In many of these markets, their products are still at the test stage.

    The firm has disrupted the internet service market in different African countries including Kenya where it had captured a market share of 0.5 percent at the end of June 2024, amassing a subscriber base that totaled 8,063 users.

    Safaricom maintained the lead with a market share of 36.4 percent, followed by JTL (24 percent) and Wananchi Group (17.5 percent).

    Starlink’s pricing strategy came under scrutiny in Nigeria where in September it shocked the market with a 97.3 percent rise in the prices of its standard residential plan to 75,000 Nigerian naira (Sh5,800) from N38,000 (Sh2,900), citing “excessive inflation”.

    This prompted consumer uproar, prompting Starlink to freeze the price hike amid talks with the regulator.

    “We are temporarily suspending this price increase as we navigate regulatory challenges. We remain committed to providing high-speed internet in Nigeria, but we need regulatory support to make the improvements necessary for a better customer experience. Without these approvals, our ability to continue delivering service is at risk,” the company said.

  • Kituo Cha Sheria Accused Of Being A Proxy Of Safaricom In Suit Against Starlink To Advance Its Monopoly

    Kituo Cha Sheria Accused Of Being A Proxy Of Safaricom In Suit Against Starlink To Advance Its Monopoly

    A company associated with a wealthy city lawyer has sought to join a case seeking to stop Safaricom and industry regulator from blocking Starlink from entering the Kenyan market by providing satellite internet services.

    Goodweek Inter-Services limited want to be enjoined in the case filed by Kituo Cha Sheria as an interested party.

    The company argues arguing that the case has been instituted by Kituo Cha Sheria as a proxy of Safaricom.

    According to the dealer, the case has been filed with the sole and impermissible purpose of corrupting the commercial and regulatory landscape and to retain and sustain an altogether impermissible monopolistic control of the telecommunication market in Kenya by Safaricom.

    “It is just and fair that the Applicant is allowed to be joined as an interested party in this Petition,” Goodweek Inter-Services ltd urged the court.

    The company said there has been a consistent pattern that any threat to the dominance of Safaricom triggers a perverse scheme in which Kituo is co-opted to block the threat.

    “This is what happened to Equity Bank’s thin-sim-card revolutionary technology that was going to obliterate Mpesa. Kituo was conscripted by Safaricom to lodge a surrogate suit to block the introduction of Equity Bank’s revolutionary technology with Kituo deploying Stalingrad tactics to delay the implementation of the said technology for more than year for the benefit of Safaricom,” says Goodweek Inter-Services ltd in court documents.

    The company adds that Safaricom’s lawyers managed, advised, monitored and supervised Kituo’s ‘surrogate’ suit in that particular instance including extracting and collecting the court orders issued against Equity Bank.

    “The details of this unholy alliance between Safaricom and Kituo are detailed in a prior suit before this Court being Constitutional Human Rights Division Petition No. E299 of 2024 Goodweek Inter-Services Limited vs Safaricom PLC & 3 Others which was filed on 21st June 2024, way before the current suit,” the firm said.

    The company said the fact that Safaricom deployed Kituo Cha Sheria in the case whilst it was fighting the said prior suit speaks to the consistency and the deployment of Kituo as the go to surrogate of Safaricom.

    “These Safaricom surrogate suits are never intended to succeed (and ultimately never succeed) but are designed to deflect, forestall and frustrate market disruptions to Safaricom’s dominance, as the outcomes of the surrogates suits eventually and eminently confirm,” company stated in it court documents.

    The company said Kituo invariably only litigates on matters related and beneficial to Safaricom in the telecommunication sector and not otherwise.

    “In this current surrogate suit, it is intended for the matter to be referred to the 2nd and 3rd Respondent, which are under the total and complete control of Safaricom’s pervasive influence capture of Safaricom and which are guaranteed to produce a result favourable to Safaricom, without Safaricom appearing to be the prime mover of the process. This is the case made out in the prior said suit of HCCHR Petition No. E299 of 2024-Goodweek Inter-Services Limited vs Safaricom PLC & 3 Others,” state Goodweek Inter-Services ltd.

    It is the firm’s argument that fearing the possibility of antagonising Starlink Limited and its owner Elon Musk, Safaricom has created a pretended “plausible deniability” defence through the surrogate petition.

    “This surrogate suit is certain to explode a major conflict between the government of the United States of America and the Government of Kenya in the subsisting trade negotiations between the two countries, to the prejudice of the people of Kenya. Safaricom does not care about this consequence,” the company further state in the court documents.

    According to Goodweek Inter-Services ltd, the conduct of Safaricom will attract the attention of the United States Securities Exchange Commission [“SEC”] and sanctions will flow from this racketeering scheme which is an offence under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

    The conduct of Safaricom in the perpetuation of its monopolistic practices is the subject matter of the aforesaid HCCHR Petition No. E299 of 2024 Goodweek Inter-Services Limited vs Safaricom PLC & 3 Others.

    “The illegal, corrupt, and anti-Kenya conduct of Safaricom ought to be investigated in the same suit as opposed to having several processes investigating the pervasive influence of Safaricom,” adds the company.

    It further state that the bastardisation of Kituo is against the constitutive instruments of this erstwhile advocacy organisation, a betrayal of the founding fathers of the organisation amongst whom are prominent jurists.

    The company application is supported with affidavit sworn by Head of Administration Salmon Ogwel who adds that Kituo invariably only litigates on matters related to and advantageous to Safaricom in the telecommunication sector and not otherwise.

    “In this current surrogate suit, it is intended for the matter to be referred to Communication Authority of Kenya and Competition Authority of Kenya, which are under the total and complete control of Safaricom’s pervasive influence and “regulatory capture” and which are guaranteed to produce a result favourable to Safaricom, without Safaricom appearing to be the prime mover of the process. This is the case made out in our earlier Petition which was filed prior to the Petition herein,”says Ogwel company head administrator.

    Ogwel further adds that the pretended posture of the current petition positing the view that it has been brought in order to protect the Kenyan public against Safaricom’s attempt to block the continued provision of services by Starlink is but a known strategic ruse. A stay (pending regulatory hearings and determination) is the clear intent of the Petitioner and its master, Safaricom.