End of spam calls and SMSes in South Africa

Recently amended regulations for the Consumer Protection Act will materially reduce unsolicited electronic marketing, also known as “spam”, in South Africa.

Simply put, these amendments are set to ensure that, if a consumer says, “Do not contact me”, marketers are now required by law to listen.

This was explained by Werksmans Attorneys’ director and regulatory head, Ahmore Burger-Smidt, who outlined these recent amendments in a press release on 20 April 2026.

Her comments follow Trade, Industry and Competition Minister Parks Tau’s recent gazetting of the Consumer Protection Act Amendment Regulations.

Burger-Smidt explained that this move means the practical machinery to curb unsolicited electronic marketing under the Consumer Protection Act is finally in force.

She said one of the most important developments brought about by the new regulations is the introduction of “cleansing”.

“Cleansing” is the process of removing consumers who have opted out of electronic communication from a direct marketer’s database to ensure they are no longer contacted. 

“This is important because it transforms the opt-out right into a recurring operational duty on marketers,” Burger-Smidt explained.

Direct marketers, in this context, refer to any person who engages in direct marketing, and therefore includes both traditional and digital outreach actors within the compliance perimeter, regardless of the specific channel they use. 

Burger-Smidt said the Regulations also define an “electronic communication recipient” as a consumer who receives electronic communication from a direct marketer and has registered a pre-emptive block.

This pre-emptive block comes about when registering a block on the opt-out registry established by the National Consumer Commission to prevent unwanted electronic communications from direct marketers.

The Regulations further clarify that registry protection attaches to recipients who have taken the step to opt out.

“Collectively, these definitions move compliance from general notions of consent and preference into a concrete taxonomy that underpins duties to register, verify, and purge marketing databases against the official registry,” Burger-Smidt explained.

‘No’ means ‘no’

In short, Burger-Smidt explained that the Regulations require direct marketers to register on the Commission’s opt-out registry using the dedicated Direct Marketer Registration Form.

This form internalises a single point of onboarding into the system for all entities engaging in direct marketing. 

Burger-Smidt warned that failure to register on this form forecloses lawful outreach, regardless of any consent arrangements a marketer may believe it holds. 

She described registration on the NCC’s opt-out registry as a “gatekeeping requirement” for any direct marketing contact.

This will not only affect legitimate marketers, she added, as the transparency rules and prohibitions on unidentifiable dissemination that come with registration will make it more difficult for bad actors to hide behind anonymity.

A corresponding Consumer Pre-emptive Block Form then specifies the data elements a consumer must provide to register a pre-emptive block. This, she said, will embed a standardised, recordable process for opt-outs. 

“The opt-out registry is to be administered by the Commission, and it must be accessible at all times, save for unforeseen technical interruptions,” she said.

“Most importantly, marketers are strictly prohibited from contacting any consumer who has registered a pre-emptive block.” 

“Combined with the requirement to cleanse databases monthly, this creates a system where consumer preferences must be actively respected on an ongoing basis.”

While it will take time for registry coverage to expand, Burger-Smidt said that, in time, this should materially reduce unsolicited electronic marketing.

“With accessible registration, clear guidance, and a centralised registry, the expectation is that adoption will grow and with it, a measurable decline in spam communications,” she said.

TechCentral recently reported that, according to Truecaller data, South Africans received over 30 billion spam calls in 2025, and the first quarter of 2026 saw a 20% year-on-year increase in spam and scam calls.

“Ultimately, these Regulations mark a shift from a fragmented and often ineffective system to a centralised, enforceable framework,” Burger-Smidt said.

“The rules are now clear, the infrastructure is in place, and compliance is no longer optional. The message is simple: if a consumer says, ‘Do not contact me’, the law now ensures that marketers must listen.”