Szia,
Victoria from Techpoint here,
Here’s what I’ve got for you today:
- MTN moves closer to owning IHS Towers
- Court backs Safaricom data leak sacking
- Mozambique blocks Internet shutdown powers
MTN moves closer to owning IHS Towers
The big news is that MTN has cleared a major hurdle in its planned takeover of IHS Towers. On August 4, 2026, IHS shareholders met to vote on the merger and approved the deal on the first vote. Shareholder approval was one of the conditions MTN needed before the transaction could proceed. The deal would see MTN acquire the roughly 75% of IHS it does not already own, taking its stake to 100%. The transaction is valued at about $2.2 billion (R35.4 billion) for the shares MTN does not already hold.
Why should anyone care about a tower deal? Because these aren’t just metal structures sitting by roadsides. Towers are the physical infrastructure that mobile networks depend on, and MTN is effectively moving to regain control of a huge chunk of infrastructure it previously separated from its business. IHS has nearly 29,000 towers across Africa, serving multiple operators in five key MTN markets. MTN says bringing IHS fully into the group fits its broader three-platform strategy under Ambition 2030, with towers becoming increasingly important as data consumption, digital services and AI infrastructure grow. Financially, MTN’s numbers also suggest why it likes the deal: the acquisition was expected to add about R2.011 billion in pro-forma profit for 2025, while increasing pro-forma EBITDA by 9% to R107.4 billion.
The interesting bit is that MTN and IHS aren’t strangers. In 2022, MTN South Africa sold 5,701 towers to IHS for R6.4 billion, excluding about R4.6 billion in lease liabilities. At the time, this was part of the broader industry shift towards tower companies owning and managing infrastructure while telecom operators focused their capital on running networks and serving customers. The Competition Commission approved that transaction in March 2022 but attached conditions around supplier development, B-BBEE ownership, tower rollout and fair access to sites. IHS subsequently became a major infrastructure partner for MTN, including providing power-management services across thousands of South African sites.
Fast-forward to February 17, 2026, and MTN announced that IHS’s board had accepted its $8.50-per-share offer to acquire the remaining shares. There was an interesting piece of housekeeping behind the move: IHS had been selling its Latin American assets, with disposals announced/completed around February 11 and 17, leaving the remaining business much more closely aligned with MTN’s African footprint. MTN said the transaction would effectively allow it to “buy back” the towers it had previously sold, while also gaining full ownership of IHS’s broader African tower portfolio. The proposed deal was still subject to shareholder and regulatory approvals, so this week’s vote removes one important obstacle but doesn’t necessarily mean the transaction is completely finished.
What’s more, African telecom operators are increasingly treating infrastructure as a strategic asset again. MTN is not simply buying towers; it’s bringing a major infrastructure platform back under its control at a time when connectivity, cloud, data centres and AI are making physical digital infrastructure more valuable. The financial upside is attractive, but there is also a trade-off: MTN’s pro forma net debt-to-EBITDA ratio rises from 0.3x to 0.8x after the transaction. So, while the R2 billion profit contribution makes for a neat headline, the more important question is what owning IHS’s infrastructure will allow MTN to do over the next decade and whether the extra control and cash generation justify taking on the additional financial exposure.
Court backs Safaricom data leak sacking
The latest development is that Kenya’s Employment and Labour Relations Court has upheld Safaricom’s decision to dismiss Brian Njoroge Wamatu, its former Head of Regional Expansion, over the improper access and alleged sharing of confidential company and subscriber information. The ruling, delivered in the dispute reported on August 6, 2026, rejected his claims of unfair termination, defamation and loss of employee share benefits. The court found that Safaricom had a valid reason for the dismissal and had followed a fair disciplinary process.
Victoria Fakiya – Senior Writer
Techpoint Digest
Stop struggling to find your tech career path
Discover in-demand tech skills and build a standout portfolio in this FREE 5-day email course
The important bit is what the court considered enough evidence for an employer to act. Safaricom’s internal investigation had linked Wamatu to the unauthorised acquisition of subscriber data, internal security information and senior managers’ remuneration details. The court said the investigation report gave Safaricom enough material to form a genuine belief that he had committed the alleged misconduct. It also made an important employment-law distinction: Safaricom did not have to prove the alleged misconduct to the criminal-law standard of beyond reasonable doubt before dismissing him; it needed a genuine, evidence-backed basis for its decision.
This is worth watching because telecom companies sit on enormous amounts of sensitive information, and the case shows how seriously courts can treat employees’ access to data outside their authorised duties. It also comes at a time when Kenya has been tightening its focus on data protection and the responsibilities of organisations handling personal information. For companies, the message is fairly straightforward: access privileges come with responsibilities, and internal controls, investigation trails and disciplinary procedures can become crucial when something goes wrong. For employees, it also highlights that having access to information through your job does not automatically mean you are free to obtain, compile or share it.
The story itself goes back to June 2019. Wamatu had joined Safaricom in November 2008, initially as a VAS Product Manager, and eventually rose to Head of Regional Expansion, earning about Sh1.2 million a month by the time his employment ended. In June 2019, he was arrested following investigations into allegations that Safaricom employees had conspired to illegally access, compile, share and sell confidential subscriber information. Wamatu said he had been accosted while having dinner in Nairobi on June 7, 2019, taken to the Directorate of Criminal Investigations, and later arraigned on charges that were subsequently amended to conspiracy to commit a felony. He maintained that Safaricom had effectively made him a scapegoat. Safaricom denied this, saying it had simply reported suspected criminal conduct to investigators.
Safaricom eventually dismissed him in June 2019, and the dispute then moved through the courts. Wamatu argued that his disciplinary hearing was unfair, partly because he was attending a DCI meeting on the scheduled date. But the court found that the DCI meeting had ended around midday and that he still had enough time to attend the 4 p.m. disciplinary hearing. Safaricom had also issued a show-cause letter, considered his written responses, provided investigation material and allowed him to appeal. The court therefore dismissed his claims in full, including his defamation claim, which it found was filed outside the one-year limitation period, and his claim over employee share-plan benefits.
Mozambique blocks Internet shutdown powers
Mozambique’s Constitutional Council has struck down several provisions of a government decree that had given authorities broad powers to suspend telecommunications and Internet services. The ruling, reported in early August, found that the government had gone beyond its powers because restrictions affecting fundamental rights needed to be established through legislation passed by parliament, rather than simply through an executive regulation.
In practical terms, this means Mozambique’s National Communications Institute (INCM) can no longer rely on those provisions of the decree as a legal basis for shutting down Internet access. The rules had also given authorities powers to monitor communications, collect user data and technically intervene in operators’ networks. The court’s reasoning is important because it is not simply saying, “don’t shut down the internet”; it is saying the executive branch cannot create these kinds of restrictions on its own when they affect constitutional rights. Parliament has to be involved.
That matters beyond Mozambique because Internet shutdowns have become a recurring tool of government control across Africa, particularly around elections, protests and political unrest. In January 2026, for example, Uganda ordered a nationwide internet shutdown shortly before its general election, while Access Now has documented repeated election-related shutdowns across the continent. For businesses, journalists, activists and ordinary users, an Internet shutdown isn’t just about losing access to social media. It can disrupt payments, communications, news reporting, online work and access to essential digital services. So a court putting a legal limit on the government’s ability to pull the plug creates an important precedent for digital rights and the separation of powers.
The road to this ruling goes back to December 16, 2025, when Mozambique adopted Decree No. 48/2025, the Telecommunications Traffic Control Regulations. The decree significantly expanded the INCM’s powers, including allowing it to suspend telecommunications services where authorities identified an imminent risk to public or state security. It also covered situations involving suspected fraud and gave the regulator wider surveillance and network-intervention powers. Civil-society and rights groups challenged the provisions, arguing that the executive had effectively created powers affecting fundamental rights without the required parliamentary authorisation.
The bigger story, then, isn’t simply “Mozambique can’t shut down the Internet anymore.” It’s that the country’s highest constitutional court has drawn a line around who gets to decide when citizens’ access to the Internet can be restricted. That distinction could become increasingly important as African governments grapple with misinformation, protests, elections and online security. Mozambique’s ruling doesn’t automatically prevent every future internet restriction — parliament could still legislate in this area — but it makes clear that sweeping powers cannot simply be handed to a regulator through an executive decree.
In case you missed them
- The AI skills employers are actually paying for
- World Bank: AI won’t replace most jobs in Africa, power and Internet remain major hurdles
What I’m watching
- AI just created viruses that never existed before: Should we be worried? | DW News
- The one career skill nobody ever teaches you | Marina Zayats | TEDxFS
Opportunities
- Moniepoint is hiring for over 100 roles. Apply here.
- Follow Techpoint Africa’s WhatsApp channel to stay on top of the latest trends and news in the African tech space here.
Have a productive week!
Victoria Fakiya for Techpoint Africa
