Online Marketplaces Competition Law in East Africa
A large marketplace can help a small seller reach customers and still create dependence. The legal question is when platform scale or conduct affects fair competition.
Contents
Concentration is a signal, not a verdict
Ask what market the platform actually
controls
When seller terms raise competition
questions
Keep evidence before a dispute starts
What platforms should build into their
rules
The practical competition test
Concentration is a signal, not a verdict
An online marketplace can give a small
business access to customers it could not reach alone. It can also become the
place where the seller depends on search rankings, reviews, payment processing,
advertising and delivery. If a platform changes fees, suspends a seller or
gives its own products better visibility, the business may have little room to
respond. The legal question is not whether a marketplace is large. It is
whether the market structure and platform conduct meet the tests in the
competition law that applies.
ECDB’s “Amazon Market Concentration: Four
in Five Dollars on Amazon Are Spent in Just Five Markets” reports that five
national markets generate about 80 per cent of Amazon’s global gross
merchandise value. This illustrates how sales can be concentrated. It does not
show how an East African marketplace performs, prove dominance in a particular
product market, or establish an infringement. An East African analysis needs
local evidence about sellers, customers, alternatives and the platform’s actual
rules.
Competition law does not usually punish a
business merely for becoming successful. A platform may grow because it offers
reliable delivery, a wider product range, trusted payments or a better shopping
experience. Concern arises when market power gives a platform the ability and
incentive to restrict competition in a way the law prohibits. Sellers should
distinguish a contract disagreement, a consumer complaint and a competition
concern; one event can raise more than one issue, but the legal route and evidence
differ.
Ask what market the platform actually controls
Market definition is not an academic
exercise. A platform may be strong for fashion sales in one city but face
effective alternatives in groceries, electronics or business-to-business trade.
A seller may reach customers through physical stores, direct social-media
sales, competing marketplaces or messaging services. Those alternatives may or
may not constrain the platform in practice. The answer depends on how easily
buyers and sellers can switch, the cost of switching and whether other channels
provide comparable reach and service.
Rwanda’s Law No. 011/2026, in force from
publication on 4 March 2026, offers a current national example. Article 8 says
dominance is assessed by considering the enterprise’s position relative to
competitors, market conditions and barriers to entry or expansion, constraints
from current or potential rivals, customer bargaining power, and the history of
competition. A high market share may be relevant, but the question is whether
real alternatives can discipline the platform.
For conduct affecting trade across the East
African Community, the EAC Competition Act, 2006 provides a regional framework
for fair competition and consumer welfare. The East African Community
Competition Authority lists the 2025 Mergers and Acquisitions Regulations and
complaints, investigations and hearings rules alongside the Act. A business
should check current scope and thresholds before assuming a matter is only
national or automatically regional. Geographic reach, affected trade and the
applicable statutory test all matter.
When seller terms raise competition questions
Consider a platform that requires sellers
to use its delivery service, prevents them from offering a lower price
elsewhere, charges different commissions without an apparent commercial reason,
or removes a seller’s listing after launching a similar in-house product. Each
fact could matter, but none proves illegality on its own. The analysis asks who
has market power, what the term or decision does, whether it disadvantages
rivals or limits customer choice, and whether a legitimate operational
explanation exists.
Rwanda’s 2026 law prohibits abuse of a
dominant position that may appreciably affect the Rwandan market or part of it.
Article 9 identifies examples including unfair trading practices, restricting
output or technical development to customers’ prejudice, and applying
dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions so trading partners face a
competitive disadvantage. The law addresses other practices too. These rules do
not make every commission, exclusive arrangement or platform preference
unlawful. They make context, market power and effect central.
A seller should read the marketplace
contract before signing and again when the platform changes its rules. Pay
attention to the legal entity operating the service, commissions and
deductions, advertising charges, suspension and appeal procedures, data access,
control of customer relationships, exclusivity and listing rankings. If the
rules let the platform change essential terms without notice, assess the
operational risk and preserve each version. A dispute is harder to explain when
the seller cannot show what the terms said at the time.
Keep evidence before a dispute starts
The records that matter are ordinary
business records. Save the seller agreement, fee schedules, policy updates,
suspension notices, payout statements and messages with platform support. Keep
dated screenshots of listing visibility and search results when a sudden change
affects sales. Record dates, products and channels involved. If several sellers
report similar changes, each should preserve their own records rather than
relying on a general claim that “everyone is affected.”
Do not alter or coordinate business records
to strengthen a complaint. Describe what happened, when it happened, the
commercial effect and which platform action is challenged. Separate documents
that show a fact from the seller’s explanation of it. This helps a marketplace,
regulator or counsel test the concern without turning an ordinary disagreement
into an unsupported allegation.
What platforms should build into their rules
Platforms also benefit from clear
procedures. Their terms should explain how commissions are calculated, what
conduct can trigger a listing restriction, how sellers can challenge a
decision, what data is used for ranking or recommendations, and what notice
accompanies material policy changes. A platform that operates both a
marketplace and its own retail business should identify potential conflicts and
maintain a documented review process. Clear governance can reduce complaints
even where the conduct is lawful.
Rwanda’s 2026 law separately addresses
online intermediaries. Article 43 requires specified information about the
intermediary and the e-commerce operators with which it has contracted, and
arrangements concerning personal-data protection. Articles 45 and 46 address
information supplied through intermediary services and removal of information
that may give rise to liability. These are concrete obligations; they should
not be mistaken for a complete statutory code on algorithmic ranking or
self-preferencing.
The practical competition test
For a seller, ask what dependence exists,
what platform decision caused the problem, what alternatives were available,
and what records show the effect on the business or customers. For a platform,
ask whether it can explain the rule, apply it consistently, identify the
decision-maker and provide a review path. These questions do not decide
liability. They help a company understand whether it has a commercial problem,
a consumer-compliance issue or a competition concern that deserves formal legal
assessment.
The ECDB concentration story is a reason to
look beyond the largest marketplace and measure what makes it powerful. In East
Africa, that means gathering evidence on seller dependence, customer switching
and cross-border reach, then applying the relevant national or regional law.
Scale may be a reason to investigate. The legal conclusion still has to be
earned with facts.
Sources Mentioned in This Business Guide
Law No. 011/2026 of 26 February 2026
relating to Competition and Consumer Protection, Official Gazette of the
Republic of Rwanda, Special Issue of 4 March 2026, especially Articles 8, 9 and
43–46; East African Community Competition Act, 2006, as amended; East African
Community Competition (Mergers and Acquisitions) Regulations, 2025; East
African Community Competition Authority, Complaints, Investigations and
Hearings Rules, 2025; ECDB, “Amazon Market Concentration: Four in Five Dollars
on Amazon Are Spent in Just Five Markets” (11 August 2026).
Suggested Citation
Ronald Serwanga, “Online Marketplaces Competition Law in East Africa,” East Africa Legal Insight (6 October 2026).