The Please Call Me case ruling shows the gap between corporate profit and public good.
The constitutional court’s recent ruling in favour of Vodacom, effectively overturning a supreme court of appeal decision that would have awarded Nkosinathi Makate between 5% and 7.5% of the revenue generated from the Please Call Me innovation, is more than just a legal outcome. It reflects a deeper problem in South Africa — the widening gap between law and justice, black versus white, between corporate profit and the public good and ultimately, between the rich and the poor.
At its heart, this case symbolised the struggle of a young black innovator against a telecoms giant. Makate’s idea, born of necessity and intended to help the poor communicate without airtime, turned into a billion-rand revenue stream for Vodacom. That he will walk away without fair compensation sends a chilling message to many South Africans. A purely intellectual contribution from the bottom of society can be ignored, undervalued and erased.
The court might have ruled within the bounds of legal technicalities but the ethical and socio-economic implications are devastating. For the poor, particularly the millions in townships and rural areas who relied on Please Call Me to reach family members, employers or even emergency services, this ruling confirms a painful truth. Even when your ideas change the world, recognition and reward are still reserved for those with legal teams and boardroom access.
But this case also strikes at the core of South Africa’s post-apartheid of inclusion, justice and transformation. The Constitution is meant to be a living document that not only protects legal rights but also upholds the dignity of all citizens. That a case like this could end in favour of a multibillion-rand corporation, after years of arbitration and negotiation, while Makate continues to fight for recognition, damages our national moral compass.
In practical terms, this ruling has broader implications for social welfare. It reinforces the dangerous perception that corporations can profit from ideas generated by the poor without meaningful accountability. It signals to future innovators from underprivileged backgrounds that their efforts could be appropriated without fair compensation. And it indirectly discourages creativity and entrepreneurship at a time when the country desperately needs new economic drivers to combat unemployment and stagnation.
It’s not just a legal setback, it’s a societal one. At a time when South Africa’s Gini coefficient remains one of the highest in the world, and when poverty continues to deepen despite marginal growth projections, this ruling throws away an opportunity to affirm the value of grassroots innovation and affirm the rights of the economically marginalised.
The ruling comes in the same week the South African Reserve Bank cut interest rates to a low not seen since 2022, signalling an attempt to stimulate consumer spending and reduce the cost of living. While this will offer minor relief to those in debt or on variable loans, it does little to address the structural inequality that the Makate case epitomises. If anything, the timing highlights the stark contrast between technocratic policy efforts to uplift the economy and the lived experience of injustice on the ground.
In a country that frequently speaks of transformation, empowerment and black excellence, the Makate decision is a sobering reminder of how far we still need to go. True transformation cannot happen when corporate power overrides individual rights. And social justice cannot exist when the legal system protects profits over people. Makate might have lost in court, but he has not lost in the court of public opinion.
Mavimbela Awam is a PhD candidate at the University of the Free State, a registered social worker, columnist and a published author.