Telecoms rapid-deployment rules open for comment; Muslim marriage protections confirmed on appeal

Government Notice 7216 of 12 March 2026 publishes a draft policy direction under section 3 of the Electronic Communications Act, 2005, directing ICASA to review and strengthen the Facilities Leasing Regulations, 2010, and to develop new Rapid Deployment Regulations to facilitate nationwide broadband rollout. Key measures include establishing qualifying criteria for licensees exercising Chapter 4 land-access rights, creating a mandatory central GIS database of new and existing network infrastructure (updated at least every two years), prescribing dispute resolution processes between licensees and landowners (with disputes to be declared at least 14 calendar days before a licensee commences land-access activities), discouraging unnecessary duplication of facilities where existing infrastructure is available, requiring all facilities leasing agreements to be filed with ICASA, and mandating annual implementation reports to the Minister. The draft addresses a regulatory gap: ICASA has not yet published rapid deployment regulations despite the statutory requirement, and the Minister notes that municipal procedural disparities are increasing costs passed on to consumers.

The appellant, a Muslim woman, sought Rule 43 interim relief (maintenance, contribution to costs) in civil divorce proceedings. The respondent husband had previously pronounced a talaq (Islamic divorce). The court a quo refused to entertain the Rule 43 application on jurisdictional grounds, holding that the appellant was no longer a 'spouse' after talaq. The Muslim Lawyers Association sought admission as amicus curiae to argue that extending the Divorce Act to Muslim marriages limited religious freedom.

The court held: The appeal was upheld. The court held that 'spouse' in Rule 43 must be interpreted purposively to include a party to a Muslim marriage notwithstanding a prior talaq. The Divorce Amendment Act 1 of 2024 applies to all Muslim marriages subsisting as at 15 December 2014, including those terminated by talaq where civil proceedings have been instituted. Parties cannot by private agreement or acquiescence waive the statutory protections and judicial oversight under section 7 of the Divorce Act. A jurisdictional order refusing to entertain Rule 43 relief is appealable because it is final and definitive of the parties' rights. The MLA's amicus application was refused. The jurisdictional ruling was set aside and the Rule 43 application permitted to be re-enrolled.

Legal impact: This is the first appellate-level interpretation of the Divorce Amendment Act 1 of 2024 in the context of Muslim marriages. It resolves uncertainty left by the Constitutional Court's interim regime in Women's Legal Centre Trust by confirming that the new legislation extends full Rule 43 interim protections to Muslim spouses even after talaq. The holding that Divorce Act protections are non-waivable prevents parties from contracting out of statutory safeguards through settlement agreements, Islamic arbitration, or acquiescence. Family law practitioners must now advise Muslim clients that talaq does not extinguish the right to civil divorce proceedings or interim relief.