Luxury Internet, People of Sacrifice: A Yellow Card to a System that Steals Connectivity from Mozambicans Vodacom, Movitel and T-Mcel: The Faces of Digital Extortion in Mozambique

For a long time, Mozambican citizens have been subjected to a seemingly endless test of patience. In a world where the internet has become an essential tool for education, work, health, and civic participation, an absurd reality persists in Mozambique: communicating is expensive, browsing is expensive, studying online is expensive, and often all of this is expensive for a service that simply doesn't work as it should. Therefore, this is a moment to show a clear and firm yellow card to the mobile phone operators that dominate the national market – Vodacom, Movitel, and Mcel – but also to the entire system that allows this situation to continue almost without serious institutional challenge.

The criticism doesn't arise from a vacuum. It stems from the daily reality of millions of Mozambicans who buy data packages and quickly realize that what was promised doesn't match what they receive. The promised speed rarely materializes. Pages take a long time to load. Videos constantly freeze. Calls made through digital applications frequently drop. In many areas of the country, simply trying to send a document or open a news page becomes a frustrating task. However, despite all these limitations, prices remain high, often outrageously high, when compared to the country's economic reality.

Mozambique is not a wealthy economy. On the contrary, a large part of the population lives on limited incomes, struggling daily to secure the essentials for survival. Even so, internet access is charged as if it were a luxury product intended for consumers with high purchasing power. The consequence is evident: millions of citizens are excluded from the digital world or are forced to sacrifice a significant portion of their income to remain minimally connected.

International reports have been confirming what citizens are already feeling in their wallets. Mozambique frequently appears among the countries where internet access is most expensive relative to the average income of the population. In some studies, the country emerges as one of the most expensive in Africa and even among the most expensive in the world in terms of the proportional cost of connectivity. Simply put, a basic internet package can consume a significant portion of an average citizen's monthly income. For many families, paying for internet means sacrificing other equally important needs.

What is most worrying is that this high cost does not correspond to a quality of service that justifies such prices. In several international digital performance indices, average internet speeds in Mozambique remain relatively low when compared to many African countries. Network stability is also frequently questioned, especially outside major urban centers. In other words, citizens pay a high price but receive little in return.

When one observes what happens in other countries with comparable economic challenges, the situation becomes even more outrageous. In Kenya, for example, the internet has become a central instrument of the digital economy, with more affordable prices and a relatively robust network supporting mobile financial services, digital commerce, and technological innovation. In Bolivia, despite the structural difficulties the country faces, data packages are more generous and more accessible to the average consumer. In Nepal, a country with enormous geographical challenges, competition between operators has led to a significant reduction in prices over the years. In Albania, which not long ago had modest economic indicators, internet access has become widely accessible thanks to policies that encouraged infrastructure expansion and protected consumers.

Given these comparisons, it becomes clear that the Mozambican situation is not inevitable. It results from choices, political decisions, regulatory models, and business strategies that, as a whole, end up penalizing the consumer.

Telecommunications operators certainly bear direct responsibility in this scenario. The market seems to function comfortably for those who sell the services, but is profoundly unfair for those who buy them. Prices remain high, data packages are often structured in a way that lacks transparency, and promotional campaigns rarely translate into real and sustainable price reductions. Citizens buy gigabytes that evaporate quickly, often without understanding exactly how they were consumed.

But it would be equally wrong to ignore the role of public institutions in this process. Mozambique's National Communications Institute should act as a guarantor of balance in the sector, protecting consumers and ensuring that the market functions fairly and competitively. However, over the past few years, many citizens have perceived the regulator as unable to impose significant changes that benefit the public.

There were even moments when proposals to increase tariffs related to data services were discussed, measures that were met with strong popular opposition. The reaction of citizens showed that there is a growing awareness of the strategic importance of the internet. People know that artificially increasing the cost of connectivity means limiting access to information, restricting economic opportunities, and deepening social inequalities.

Despite public opposition, many tariff changes end up happening gradually, almost imperceptibly, introduced through different regulatory or fiscal mechanisms. The end result is always the same: the citizen pays more.

It is impossible to analyze this reality without also considering the financial context of the State itself. Mozambique has faced significant budgetary difficulties for several years, and the government has been seeking new sources of revenue to balance public accounts. Unfortunately, the solution often seems to involve taxing sectors that are already essential to economic and social life, such as telecommunications.

When internet access begins to be seen primarily as an opportunity for tax collection, the strategic vision that should guide public development policies is completely lost. Instead of being treated as a fundamental infrastructure for economic and social progress, connectivity becomes viewed as a product from which more taxes can be extracted.

This logic is deeply limited and dangerous. In the 21st century, the internet is not a luxury. It is an indispensable tool for development. It is through the internet that students can access educational platforms, professionals can work remotely, small businesses can find new markets, and communities can share vital information.

In many emergency situations, digital connectivity can be the difference between life and death. During natural disasters, epidemics, or humanitarian crises, the internet allows for coordinated rapid responses, dissemination of safety information, and keeping communities informed about risks and protective measures. Limiting or excessively increasing the cost of this access weakens society's ability to respond.

Even more worrying is the fact that debates are beginning to emerge about possible legal mechanisms that would allow limiting internet access at certain times considered politically sensitive. Recent history in several countries demonstrates that internet shutdowns are frequently used to control public narratives, hinder social organization, and restrict the flow of information.

Mozambican society has demonstrated increasing vigilance towards this type of proposal. Activists, journalists, and civil society organizations have repeatedly reminded the public that access to information is a fundamental right and that any attempt to restrict this access represents a democratic setback.

Mozambican citizens are increasingly aware of the role the internet plays in the modern world. And that is precisely why indignation grows when they realize they are paying dearly for a service that, in many cases, does not even minimally meet expectations.

This yellow card is therefore more than just criticism. It is a clear warning. A warning to the operators to understand that consumer trust cannot be exploited indefinitely. A warning to regulatory institutions to fully assume their role in defending the public interest. And a warning to the government itself, which urgently needs to understand that the country's digital development cannot be built on a model that transforms connectivity into a privilege for the few.

Mozambicans already bear high costs in almost every aspect of daily life. Expensive energy, expensive transport, expensive fuel, and often deficient public services. Adding to that list one of the most expensive internet connections in the world is a burden that few can afford to bear.

Today, the yellow card is raised. It's a gesture of warning, of indignation, and of hope that something can change. But history shows that when warnings are ignored and injustices persist, social pressure inevitably grows.

And when a people begins to feel that they are paying too much for almost everything and receiving too little in return, the issue ceases to be merely economic. It becomes political, social, and moral. Because no society can prosper when access to knowledge, information, and communication is treated as a luxury reserved for the few.