The Minister of Communications and Digital Technologies has removed small parcels from SAPO’s exclusive domain. Yet the Post Office maintains that its monopoly remains in force. How much longer must South Africa’s courier industry operate under this uncertainty?
On 23 December 2024, I published a blog highlighting the South African Post Office’s (SAPO) insistence that parcels weighing less than 1kg could only be delivered by SAPO.
The restriction was not confined to letters and ordinary snail mail. It extended to small parcels containing electronics, jewellery, cosmetics, fashion accessories and other products routinely transported by South Africa’s courier industry.
The dispute was not new.
As far back as 2003, the Supreme Court of Appeal had dealt with the interpretation of the postal services legislation in Interlink Postal Courier v South African Post Office.
The issue resurfaced in 2019 when ICASA’s Complaints and Compliance Committee upheld a complaint against PostNet concerning the delivery of reserved postal items. PostNet challenged the decision, with the late Gary Marshall of the South African Express Parcel Association (SAEPA) and Takealot subsequently becoming involved in the dispute.
The underlying issue was straightforward. Private courier companies had been delivering small parcels for years, yet SAPO maintained that the legislation reserved this category of business for itself.
The rapid growth of e-commerce made the issue considerably more important. We were no longer talking about a few letters or small packages. We were talking about a substantial part of South Africa’s parcel delivery market.
The Minister intervenes
On 12 December 2025, the Minister of Communications and Digital Technologies, Solly Malatsi, published a determination removing small parcels from the category of reserved postal services.
The determination also provided for a one-year period during which SAPO could continue providing reserved postal services.
The removal of small parcels was a significant development for private courier operators, although the precise effect of the transitional arrangements remains a matter of dispute.
One would have thought that this would finally resolve the issue.
Unfortunately, it has not.
SAPO’s business-rescue practitioners, Anoosh Rooplal and Juanito Damons, subsequently told technology publication MyBroadband that the exclusivity remained in force and that ICASA would first have to ratify the Minister’s directive through its regulatory approval process.
In January 2026, the practitioners confirmed that, in their view, SAPO’s exclusivity was still effective.
This raises a rather interesting question.
The Minister has exercised his statutory authority to remove small parcels from SAPO’s exclusive domain. SAPO’s business-rescue practitioners, however, maintain that the exclusivity continues until the necessary regulatory processes have been completed.
Who, then, is actually determining the rules under which South Africa’s courier industry must operate?
There may well be legitimate legal questions concerning the implementation of the Minister’s determination. However, those questions require a clear regulatory answer rather than leaving courier companies to interpret conflicting positions for themselves.
I approached SAPO’s business-rescue practitioners for comment
Given the importance of this issue to the courier industry, I contacted SAPO’s business-rescue practitioners directly and requested clarification of their position.
My email was read, but at the time of writing, I have received no response.
I would have welcomed an explanation of the legal basis upon which SAPO continues to assert exclusivity, particularly in light of the Minister’s published determination.
The absence of a response does not establish that SAPO’s interpretation is incorrect. It does, however, leave the questions I raised unanswered.
And those questions have very real commercial implications.
Why does SAPO want to retain this monopoly?
To understand the significance of the dispute, we need to consider the potential size of the market.
In my previous blog, I referred to an estimate that parcels weighing less than 1kg represented between 40% and 60% of total parcel volumes in South Africa.
This remains an estimate rather than a verified industry-wide figure, but it illustrates the potential scale of the issue.
Consider The Courier Guy, which reported delivering 21.55 million parcels in 2024.
If only 40% of those parcels weighed less than 1kg, that would represent approximately 8.62 million deliveries in a single year.
At 50%, the figure would be approximately 10.78 million.
These are illustrative calculations, not a claim about The Courier Guy’s actual parcel weight distribution.
And that is just one courier company.
Now consider the combined volumes of the many other courier operators, retail collection networks and e-commerce delivery services operating throughout South Africa.
We are dealing with a market that has developed extensive infrastructure, invested in technology and established delivery networks to service precisely the type of parcels that SAPO has sought to reserve for itself.
This raises a rather obvious question.
If SAPO were able to enforce its exclusivity over all qualifying small parcels, could it physically handle the volumes currently being delivered by the private courier industry?
And if it could not, what would happen to the businesses and consumers who depend on those deliveries?
An extraordinary proposal: Fine the couriers and give SAPO the money
There is another aspect of this dispute that deserves attention.
In its business-rescue reporting, SAPO proposed that ICASA should impose fines on private courier companies carrying reserved parcels and ring-fence the proceeds for the Post Office.
Think about the implications.
Private courier companies have invested their own money in vehicles, depots, sorting facilities, technology and distribution networks. They employ thousands of people and provide an essential service to businesses and consumers.
SAPO’s proposal would potentially see some of those companies penalised for carrying parcels that they have been delivering for years, with the proceeds directed to SAPO.
There is a legitimate public interest in maintaining universal postal services, particularly in areas where private operators may not find it commercially viable to operate.
However, the question is whether protecting SAPO’s traditional postal obligations requires it to retain exclusive rights over the growing commercial e-commerce parcel market.
These are two different issues.
A universal postal service provides access to essential postal facilities across the country. A commercial courier service competes for business on price, service, reliability and delivery times.
The financial challenges facing SAPO do not make those distinctions disappear.
Where does this leave the courier industry?
As matters stand, there are three positions that need to be reconciled.
The Minister has published a determination removing small parcels from the reserved postal services category.
SAPO’s business-rescue practitioners maintain that the exclusivity remains effective pending the necessary regulatory processes.
Meanwhile, the government’s published guidance on reserved postal services continues to include small parcels and identifies SAPO as the only licensed operator of reserved services.
And the private courier industry continues delivering small parcels every day.
The result is an unacceptable degree of uncertainty for businesses that have invested heavily in their operations and whose customers depend on their services.
A courier company collecting a 500g parcel should not have to speculate about whether it is legally entitled to deliver it.
Nor should it face the possibility of regulatory action without a clear understanding of the applicable rules.
The Minister’s determination, the effect of the transitional period and any outstanding ICASA processes need to be addressed unequivocally.
The question is no longer simply whether SAPO should retain its monopoly. It is why the industry is still waiting for a definitive answer about the implementation of a decision that was published in December 2025.
I would welcome a response from SAPO’s business-rescue practitioners and ICASA clarifying precisely what remains to be done and when the industry can expect the matter to be resolved.
Until then, the uncertainty continues.
And there is an even more interesting question that deserves consideration.
Rather than continuing to fight the private courier industry for exclusive rights over small parcels, could SAPO actually benefit from working with that industry?
In my next blog, I will examine whether SAPO’s national network could become a valuable commercial asset for private courier companies, particularly when it comes to last-mile deliveries in areas where the economics of operating a dedicated courier network are challenging.