This article analyses the dynamics of regulatory conflicts within Tanzania’s communications sector and evaluates the efficacy of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) as a mechanism for enhancing fairness, efficiency, and stakeholder confidence in dispute settlement. Anchored in the Regulatory Theory and the Access to Justice Theory, the study adopts a qualitative approach combining documentary analysis with semi-structured interviews involving telecommunications operators, broadcasting firms, online content providers, and officials of the Tanzania Communications Regulatory Authority (TCRA). The findings reveal that although Tanzania’s legal framework nominally recognises ADR, it lacks comprehensive statutory procedures, binding timelines, and enforcement mechanisms. Institutional weaknesses are evident within the TCRA’s Complaints Committee, which functions primarily as an investigative unit without sufficient autonomy, jurisdictional clarity, or professional expertise in ADR practice. Broader systemic issues—particularly consumer vulnerability, information asymmetry, and high litigation costs—further inhibit effective resolution of disputes. Nevertheless, respondents expressed strong support for reform. They advocated the establishment of an independent ADR unit within TCRA, the enactment of detailed procedural rules, and the strengthening of enforcement mechanisms. Comparative experiences from Ofcom (UK), ICASA (South Africa), and TDSAT (India) illustrate that institutionalising ADR within regulatory frameworks promotes legitimacy, reduces litigation, and improves access to justice. The article concludes that embedding ADR into Tanzania’s communications regulatory architecture is both imperative and timely to achieve a transparent, equitable, and consumer-responsive system.
