The Association of Communications & Technology (ACT) has formally withdrawn its high‑court challenge to Home Affairs Minister Leon Schreiber’s steep increase in identity‑verification fees. After filing the suit in January, ACT members opted to negotiate directly with the department, prompting the court to record the withdrawal on 8 April.
Identity verification fees
ACT’s original complaint stemmed from the minister’s decision to raise the charge for querying the national population register from a nominal 15 cents to R10 per request – a surge that can exceed 6 500 percent. The hike hit telecom operators that must verify customers under the RICA (Regulation of Interception of Communications and Provision of Communication) framework, as well as banks relying on real‑time ID checks for account opening.
In a brief interview, ACT chief executive Nomvuyiso Batyi explained that the association “has withdrawn, as our members have elected to directly enter into agreements with Home Affairs.” By sidestepping the collective lawsuit, each company now seeks tailored terms that suit its own operational needs.
Minister Schreiber welcomed the development, stating that mobile networks had “reached out to work with the department” on broader digital‑transformation projects, including the rollout of digital IDs. He added that recent upgrades to the online verification system have lifted uptime from 50 % to 99 %, delivering query results “in mere seconds.” An off‑peak batch‑verification option priced at R1 per request has also been introduced.
The fee increase, announced in July 2025, sparked immediate backlash from industry groups that argued they had not been consulted. ACT’s members – Cell C, Liquid Intelligent Technologies, MTN South Africa, Rain, Vodacom South Africa, and Telkom – are legally obliged to perform identity checks when registering SIM cards, placing them at the centre of the dispute.
Digital‑bank pioneer GoTyme Bank (formerly TymeBank) was among the first to publicly challenge the new pricing, labeling it a “regressive tax on the most vulnerable South Africans.” The bank’s co‑founder, Coen Jonker, warned that higher verification costs could be passed on to low‑income consumers who already face financial strain.
Last year, Home Affairs painted the telecoms sector as “profiting enormously” from underpriced access to citizens’ personal data, while taxpayers continued to subsidise system upkeep. The minister argued that charging market rates would ensure a sustainable, world‑class verification platform and reduce the fiscal burden on the state.
In response to the withdrawal, Schreiber framed the outcome as a gateway for deeper collaboration. He highlighted a recent partnership with banks that has enabled “smart ID services at 110 branch locations within a month of launch,” showcasing the government’s commitment to expanding digital identity infrastructure.
Industry analysts suggest that individual negotiations may provide more certainty than a prolonged legal battle, especially given the non‑negotiable nature of RICA compliance for mobile operators. By engaging directly with Home Affairs, companies can secure pricing arrangements that reflect their usage patterns and budget constraints.
While the fee structure remains a flashpoint for sectors dependent on state‑held identity data, the removal of the high‑profile court case eases the most visible pressure on Schreiber’s pricing model. The move paves the way for ongoing dialogue between the department and the telecommunications industry as South Africa pushes forward its digital transformation agenda.
Ultimately, ACT’s decision to abandon the collective lawsuit underscores a pragmatic shift toward bespoke agreements, allowing both the government and its commercial partners to focus on strengthening the nation’s identity‑verification ecosystem.