Uganda Finally Activates Competition Law With New Regulations For much of the 2010s, two players - MTN and Airtel - controlled nearly the entire mobile money market. With no competition watchdog, fees stayed high, interoperability came late, and smaller players like Africell eventually exited. With the Regulations now gazetted, Uganda joins peers like Kenya, South Africa, and COMESA in giving regulators teeth to tackle anti-competitive conduct, mergers, and consumer abuse.

After a year in legal limbo, Uganda’s Competition Act has finally come to life.

The Competition Regulations, 2025, are now in force, setting the stage for active enforcement of antitrust and consumer protection rules.

This is the first time in the country’s history.

Until now, Uganda lacked an operational competition framework.

The Act had been passed but was unenforceable because the six-month statutory deadline for regulations expired in October 2024.

With the Regulations now gazetted, Uganda joins peers like Kenya, South Africa, and COMESA in giving regulators teeth to tackle anti-competitive conduct, mergers, and consumer abuse.

Why?

For years, the absence of an operational competition law left Uganda’s markets vulnerable to unfair practices.

Telecom dominance: For much of the 2010s, two players — MTN and Airtel — controlled nearly the entire mobile money market.

With no competition watchdog, fees stayed high, interoperability came late, and smaller players like Africell eventually exited.

A functional law could have tackled dominance abuses earlier.

Sugar and cement cartels: Manufacturers have periodically been accused of coordinated price hikes in staple sectors like sugar and cement.

In the absence of a regulator empowered to investigate price-fixing, consumers faced sudden surges in essential goods with little transparency.

Beer duopoly: Nile Breweries and Uganda Breweries have long dominated the beer market.

Without merger control or abuse-of-dominance provisions, their grip on distribution and pricing went unchecked.

This made entry nearly impossible for smaller brewers.

Cross-border lessons: In Kenya, the Competition Authority fined bread makers for price-fixing and blocked mergers that threatened to reduce consumer choice.

In Uganda, similar practices would have gone unchallenged until now.

These examples illustrate why the new framework matters.

Uganda can now scrutinize mergers, block cartels, and challenge dominant firms to safeguard competition and consumer welfare.

Key features of the regulations

Enforcement Architecture: The Ministry of Trade is empowered to investigate, regulate, and enforce the Act.

It is supported by a technical committee that can form subcommittees, liaise with regional and international authorities, and mediate disputes.

Merger Control: Businesses must now notify and seek approval for mergers or acquisitions that may substantially lessen competition.

This brings Uganda into line with global practice and will impact deal structuring across banking, telecom, and fast-moving consumer goods.

Cartel and Abuse Rules: Explicit bans on price-fixing, market allocation, bid rigging, and abuse of dominance put companies on notice.

The law creates penalties and potential sanctions for firms found to restrict competition.

Consumer Protection: The framework gives regulators a dual mandate: not only to police firms but also to protect consumer welfare, ensuring fair pricing, quality standards, and redress mechanisms.

Technical Committee Powers: The technical committee can propose new policies, set standards, and even act as a mediator between businesses and government in disputes — suggesting an activist, policy-shaping role.

What businesses should expect?

The Regulations herald increased compliance costs. Companies, especially multinationals, will need to align their contracts, distribution agreements, and M&A strategies with competition rules.

Lawyers and economists are likely to see a surge in demand for advisory, merger filings, and defense in investigations.

For Uganda’s economy, the move signals a transition toward a more rules-based marketplace.

The framework promises to curb monopolistic practices, foster innovation, and protect consumers.

But it also raises the stakes for enforcement capacity.

Whether the Ministry of Trade can build the institutional muscle to investigate, prosecute, and regulate effectively will determine if the law can bite or remain on paper.

Investor lens

For investors, the Regulations add both risk and certainty.

Risk, because transactions now face regulatory hurdles; certainty, because clear rules on competition reduce the unpredictability of market power abuses.

In a region where fair competition is increasingly linked to integration and growth, Uganda’s move may improve its investment climate.

It signals a commitment to transparency and consumer welfare.