Isaac Lokule Emmanuel, the author

The recent adjustment of telecommunications tariffs in South Sudan has generated widespread criticism, particularly on social media, as consumers brace for higher costs of phone calls and internet services starting midnight on June 26. While public concern is justified, social media alone cannot reverse regulatory decisions or provide binding remedies.

The National Communications Authority (NCA) approved the phased adjustment following consultations with the Ministry of ICT and Postal Services, Parliament, mobile network operators, and civil society organizations.

According to the regulator, the move is intended to help telecommunications companies remain operational amid mounting economic challenges, including high inflation, depreciation of the South Sudanese pound, and limited access to foreign currency.

In a joint statement, operators—MTN, Zain, and Digitel—explained that the measure is not a direct tariff increase, but rather an adjustment of the tariff exchange rate to reflect prevailing economic realities. They cited rising operational costs such as fuel prices, infrastructure maintenance, software licensing, and reliance on foreign currency for imported equipment and satellite services.

The companies stated that the adjustment would be implemented in phases to minimize its impact on consumers and to sustain reliable communication services.
The NCA has also emphasized that operators have been directed to absorb a significant share of inflationary pressures to safeguard the sector’s sustainability.

Speaking at a press conference in Juba, NCA Director General Rizig Dominic reiterated that the underlying tariffs themselves have not changed, noting that the international benchmark for voice calls remains at $0.04 per minute. However, a significant disparity persists between the official exchange rate and the rates at which telecom operators access foreign currency from commercial banks—factors that have contributed to the adjustment.

Despite these explanations, many consumers remain unconvinced, arguing that the practical effect of the adjustment is an increase in the cost of communication services. This tension highlights the importance of addressing the issue through proper legal channels rather than relying solely on public outcry.

If mobile phone users believe the tariff adjustment is unlawful, unfair, or inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of South Sudan, the appropriate course of action is to pursue legal redress by challenging the decision before a competent court. The judiciary—not social media—is the proper forum to determine whether the NCA acted within its legal mandate and whether due process and consumer protections were adequately upheld.

Constructive civic engagement requires citizens to utilize legal institutions to defend their rights and hold public authorities accountable. A well-founded legal challenge would not only clarify the legality of the tariff adjustment but could also set an important precedent for regulatory transparency and accountability in South Sudan.

Ultimately, resolving disputes of this nature through the courts strengthens public trust in institutions and reinforces the rule of law. It ensures that both regulators and service providers remain subject to legal scrutiny, while also providing consumers with a legitimate avenue to seek justice.

Editor Note: Isaac Lokule Emmanuel is a first-year law student at the University of Juba, and the views expressed herein are solely those of the author.