Independent Auditor’s report to the Members of Airtel Africa plc

Report on the audit of the financial statements

1. Opinion

We have audited the financial statements which comprise:

• the consolidated statement of comprehensive income;
• the consolidated and parent company statements of financial position;
• the consolidated and parent company statements of changes in equity;
• the consolidated statement of cash flows; and
• the related notes 1 to 38 to the consolidated financial statements and the related notes 1 to 11 to the parent company financial statements.

The financial reporting framework that has been applied in the preparation of the group financial statements is applicable law, United Kingdom adopted international accounting standards and IFRS Accounting Standards as issued by the IASB. The financial reporting framework that has been applied in the preparation of the parent company financial statements is applicable law and United Kingdom Accounting Standards, including FRS 101 “Reduced Disclosure Framework” (United Kingdom Generally Accepted Accounting Practice).

2. Basis for opinion

We conducted our audit in accordance with International Standards on Auditing (UK) (ISAs (UK)) and applicable law. Our responsibilities under those standards are further described in the auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial statements section of our report.

We are independent of the group and the parent company in accordance with the ethical requirements that are relevant to our audit of the financial statements in the UK, including the United Kingdom Financial Reporting Council’s (the ‘UK FRC’s’) Ethical Standard as applied to listed public interest entities, and we have fulfilled our other ethical responsibilities in accordance with these requirements. The non-audit services provided to the group and the parent company for the year are disclosed in note 8.1 to the financial statements. We confirm that we have not provided any non-audit services prohibited by the UK FRC’s Ethical Standard to the group or the parent company.

We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion.

3. Summary of our audit approach

4. Conclusions relating to going concern

In auditing the financial statements, we have concluded that the directors’ use of the going concern basis of accounting in the preparation of the financial statements is appropriate.

Our evaluation of the directors’ assessment of the group’s and parent company’s ability to continue to adopt the going concern basis of accounting included:

• obtaining an understanding of the relevant controls over the group’s forecasting process;
• performing retrospective reviews of the historical forecasts to assess the reasonableness of the group’s forecasting process;
• performing risk assessment procedures in response to continued macro-economic uncertainty, including the effect of the conflict in the Middle East;
• assessing the reasonableness of the anticipated impact of the group’s principal risks on the group’s cash flow projections, including within the reasonable worst case forecast;
• assessing the consistency of cash flow forecasts with the cash flow forecasts used for the purposes of goodwill impairment reviews, long term viability assessment and recognition of deferred tax assets;
• assessing and challenging the assumptions used by the directors in each of the cash flow forecasts, considering our own expectations based on our knowledge of the group;
• assessing and challenging the key mitigating actions available including a reduction in capital expenditure and lower dividend pay-outs;
• obtaining direct confirmations from banks of the value, duration and terms for the group’s undrawn committed facilities at the year-end date and the terms thereof;
• recalculating the cash headroom available using undrawn committed facilities in each of the scenarios prepared by management and approved by the directors and testing the logic and mechanical accuracy of the going concern model;
• assessing the reasonableness of the reverse stress test scenario; and
• assessing the appropriateness of the financial statement disclosures related to going concern.

Based on the work we have performed, we have not identified any material uncertainties relating to events or conditions that, individually or collectively, may cast significant doubt on the group’s and parent company’s ability to continue as a going concern for a period of at least twelve months from when the financial statements are authorised for issue.

In relation to the reporting on how the group has applied the UK Corporate Governance Code, we have nothing material to add or draw attention to in relation to the directors’ statement in the financial statements about whether the directors considered it appropriate to adopt the going concern basis of accounting.

Our responsibilities and the responsibilities of the directors with respect to going concern are described in the relevant sections of this report.

7.2 Use of technology in our audit

The design of our audit approach reflects the group structure, utilising data extracted from the Group’s systems, to effectively address risks of material misstatement. We have deployed and utilised data analytics across the group, providing a more detailed understanding of the flow of transactions, enabling us to conduct a more focused risk assessment and design targeted audit testing procedures. We embed technology throughout our audit to improve quality and effectiveness, including in the areas of planning, project management, risks and controls assessment, substantive testing and reporting insights to management and the Audit and Risk Committee.

To support our iterative risk assessment process, across significant account balances, we have used our data analytical tools to scrutinise large transactional data sets for unusual trends, characteristics, outliers or transaction flows to support our identification of audit risks.

Across the whole Group, we continued to use profiling technology to identify journal entries that exhibit potential fraud characteristics in testing the appropriateness of journal entries and other adjustments as part of our response to the risk of management override of controls.

7.3. Our consideration of the control environment

7.3.1 IT controls

As a business, the group is heavily reliant on IT systems. Therefore, effective IT controls are important not just to address financial risks, but also for other areas such as operational, regulatory and reputational risk. Given the high volume, low value nature of the group’s transactions, reliance on the IT control environment is a fundamental part of the audit approach, not least for revenue.

Our assessment of the IT control environment included testing general IT controls (such as user access and IT change management), automated controls (such as appropriate configuration of tariffs) and system generated reports (such as daily recharge reports).

The key systems in scope for the audit were the accounting and revenue recording systems (IN and Mobiquity), including revenue recording systems managed in country (such as those relating to prepaid, mobile money and interconnect revenue) and the group’s general ledger system. The group is reliant on third parties for the support and maintenance of these systems, and arrangements are in place with a range of third-party IT providers.

7.3.2 Business processes

We relied on controls for our audits of scoped in balances over the prepaid revenue, interconnect revenue, mobile money revenue, expenditure and payables, property plant and equipment, treasury and payroll cycles. We also relied on controls on the central processes for the classification of legal and regulatory cases, the recording of leases and the consolidation processes.

7.4. Our consideration of climate-related risks

The group has disclosed its Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (“TCFD”) on pages 63 to 76 of the Annual Report, including its governance process for managing climate related risks, the climate related risks and opportunities, and how these risks and opportunities are managed. We assessed the TCFD recommended disclosures within the Annual Report and considered whether they are materially consistent with the financial statements and our knowledge obtained in the audit.

We obtained an understanding of management’s process for considering the impact of climate-related risks. We evaluated these risks to assess whether they were complete and consistent with our understanding of the group and our wider risk assessment procedures. Management considered the impact of climate change on the impairment review performed on the group’s assets. Management disclosed in note 16 that no reasonable possible change in any assumption underpinning the impairment review would lead to an impairment which includes the impact of climate change. We have assessed the appropriateness of this disclosure.

7.5. Working with other auditors

The work undertaken on components was in all cases performed by Deloitte member firms. The majority of account balances are managed and audited at the shared service centre in India. This is supplemented by the management and audit of account balances at each operating company and the group head office in Dubai.

We held a planning meeting in Kenya with the audit teams of the seven largest countries by combined contribution, covering components across mobile services and mobile money (and the shared service centre in India) to discuss and agree the planning and execution of the audit; at the same meeting we met with group management to communicate our planned audit strategy including key audit focus areas.

As part of our oversight procedures, in the current year we visited Nigeria, DRC, Zambia and Kenya. We did not visit Uganda, Malawi and Tanzania, exercising a rotational approach as these were visited within the last two years. We therefore performed our oversight procedures virtually. We also visited India for oversight of the audit work performed for the shared service centre. We remained in regular contact with all component teams throughout the year to understand key issues and appropriately plan and execute the year end audit. The frequency of these interactions was increased during the key audit periods and included direct calls between senior members of the group and component audit teams. Due to the conflict in the Middle East, we were unable to visit the head office in United Arab Emirates but held virtual meetings with key executives.

We issued detailed instructions to our component audit teams, included them within our team briefings and regular status calls, and reviewed component auditor working papers during the above component visits and remotely via online review of their audit files.

Throughout the core period of the audit, we held regular calls with group management, which also involved Deloitte India, who audit the shared service centre in India and where the majority of account balances are managed.

8. Other information

The other information comprises the information included in the annual report, including the strategic report, the governance report, and the other information section, other than the financial statements and our auditor’s report thereon. The directors are responsible for the other information contained within the annual report.

Our opinion on the financial statements does not cover the other information and, except to the extent otherwise explicitly stated in our report, we do not express any form of assurance conclusion thereon.

Our responsibility is to read the other information and, in doing so, consider whether the other information is materially inconsistent with the financial statements, or our knowledge obtained in the course of the audit, or otherwise appears to be materially misstated.

If we identify such material inconsistencies or apparent material misstatements, we are required to determine whether this gives rise to a material misstatement in the financial statements themselves. If, based on the work we have performed, we conclude that there is a material misstatement of this other information, we are required to report that fact.

We have nothing to report in this regard.

9. Responsibilities of directors

As explained more fully in the directors’ responsibilities statement, the directors are responsible for the preparation of the financial statements and for being satisfied that they give a true and fair view, and for such internal control as the directors determine is necessary to enable the preparation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.

In preparing the financial statements, the directors are responsible for assessing the group’s and the parent company’s ability to continue as a going concern, disclosing as applicable, matters related to going concern and using the going concern basis of accounting unless the directors either intend to liquidate the group or the parent company or to cease operations, or have no realistic alternative but to do so.

10. Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial statements

Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements as a whole are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to issue an auditor’s report that includes our opinion. Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance, but is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with ISAs (UK) will always detect a material misstatement when it exists. Misstatements can arise from fraud or error and are considered material if, individually or in the aggregate, they could reasonably be expected to influence the economic decisions of users taken on the basis of these financial statements.

A further description of our responsibilities for the audit of the financial statements is located on the UK FRC’s website at: www.frc.org.uk/auditorsresponsibilities. This description forms part of our auditor’s report.

11. Extent to which the audit was considered capable of detecting irregularities, including fraud

Irregularities, including fraud, are instances of non-compliance with laws and regulations. We design procedures in line with our responsibilities, outlined above, to detect material misstatements in respect of irregularities, including fraud. The extent to which our procedures are capable of detecting irregularities, including fraud is detailed below.

11.1. Identifying and assessing potential risks related to irregularities

In identifying and assessing risks of material misstatement in respect of irregularities, including fraud and non-compliance with laws and regulations, we considered the following:

• the nature of the industry and sector, control environment and business performance including the design of the group’s remuneration policies, key drivers for directors’ remuneration, bonus levels and performance targets;
• results of our enquiries of management, internal audit, the directors and the Audit and Risk Committee about their own identification and assessment of the risks of irregularities, including those that are specific to the group’s sector;
• any matters we identified having obtained and reviewed the group’s documentation of their policies and procedures relating to:
• identifying, evaluating and complying with laws and regulations and whether they were aware of any instances of non-compliance;
• detecting and responding to the risks of fraud and whether they have knowledge of any actual, suspected or alleged;
• the internal controls established to mitigate risks of fraud or non-compliance with laws and regulations; and
• the matters discussed among the audit engagement team including significant component audit teams and relevant internal specialists, including tax, fraud, valuations and IT specialists regarding how and where fraud might occur in the financial statements and any potential indicators of fraud.

As a result of these procedures, we considered the opportunities and incentives that may exist within the organisation for fraud and identified the greatest potential for fraud in the following areas: prepaid and mobile money revenue and the existence of mobile money restricted cash. In common with all audits under ISAs (UK), we are also required to perform specific procedures to respond to the risk of management override.

We also obtained an understanding of the legal and regulatory frameworks that the group operates in, focusing on provisions of those laws and regulations that had a direct effect on the determination of material amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. The key laws and regulations we considered in this context included the UK Companies Act, Listing Rules and tax legislation within the jurisdictions that the group operates.

In addition, we considered provisions of other laws and regulations that do not have a direct effect on the financial statements but compliance with which may be fundamental to the group’s ability to operate or to avoid a material penalty. These included the regulations set by the applicable telecommunication and financial services (for mobile money) regulators within each operating entity and the relevant financial regulations which govern the group’s components.

11.2. Audit response to risks identified

As a result of performing the above, we identified prepaid and mobile money revenue and mobile money restricted cash as key audit matters relating to the potential risk of fraud or non-compliance with laws and regulations. The key audit matters section of our report explains the matters in more detail and also describes the specific procedures we performed in response to those key audit matters.

In addition to the above, our procedures to respond to risks identified included the following:

• reviewing the financial statement disclosures and testing to supporting documentation to assess compliance with provisions of relevant laws and regulations described as having a direct effect on the financial statements;
• enquiring of management, the Audit and Risk Committee and in-house legal counsel concerning actual and potential litigation and claims;
• performing analytical procedures to identify any unusual or unexpected relationships that may indicate risks of material misstatement due to fraud;
• reading minutes of meetings of those charged with governance, reviewing internal audit reports and reviewing relevant correspondence with relevant tax authorities; and
• in addressing the risk of fraud through management override of controls, testing the appropriateness of journal entries and other adjustments; assessing whether the judgements made in making accounting estimates are indicative of a potential bias; and evaluating the business rationale of any significant transactions that are unusual or outside the normal course of business.

We also communicated relevant identified laws and regulations and potential fraud risks to all engagement team members including internal specialists and significant component audit teams and remained alert to any indications of fraud or non-compliance with laws and regulations throughout the audit.

Report on other legal and regulatory requirements

12. Opinions on other matters prescribed by the Companies Act 2006

13. Corporate Governance Statement

The Listing Rules require us to review the directors’ statement in relation to going concern, longer-term viability and that part of the Corporate Governance Statement relating to the group’s compliance with the provisions of the UK Corporate Governance Code specified for our review.

14. Matters on which we are required to report by exception

14.1. Adequacy of explanations received and accounting records

Under the Companies Act 2006 we are required to report to you if, in our opinion:

• we have not received all the information and explanations we require for our audit; or
• adequate accounting records have not been kept by the parent company, or returns adequate for our audit have not been received from branches not visited by us; or
• the parent company financial statements are not in agreement with the accounting records and returns.

We have nothing to report in respect of these matters.

14.2. Directors’ remuneration

Under the Companies Act 2006 we are also required to report if in our opinion certain disclosures of directors’ remuneration have not been made or the part of the directors’ remuneration report to be audited is not in agreement with the accounting records and returns.

We have nothing to report in respect of these matters.

15. Other matters which we are required to address

15.1. Auditor tenure

Following the recommendation of the Audit and Risk Committee, we were appointed by the Board in April 2019 to audit the financial statements for the year ended 31 March 2019 and subsequent financial periods. The period of total uninterrupted engagement including previous renewals and reappointments of the firm is eight years, covering the years ended 31 March 2019 to 31 March 2026.

15.2. Consistency of the audit report with the additional report to the Audit and Risk committee

Our audit opinion is consistent with the additional report to the Audit and Risk Committee we are required to provide in accordance with ISAs (UK).

15.3. Limited assurance conclusion on the Group’s control attestation

We issued a limited assurance conclusion on the Group’s control attestation as of 31 March 2026, for the purpose of meeting regulatory requirements in Nigeria only. This limited assurance report on financial controls is separate from our opinion on these financial statements.

16. Use of our report

This report is made solely to the company’s members, as a body, in accordance with Chapter 3 of Part 16 of the Companies Act 2006. Our audit work has been undertaken so that we might state to the company’s members those matters we are required to state to them in an auditor’s report and for no other purpose. To the fullest extent permitted by law, we do not accept or assume responsibility to anyone other than the company and the company’s members as a body, for our audit work, for this report, or for the opinions we have formed.

As required by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) Disclosure Guidance and Transparency Rule (DTR) 4.1.15R – DTR 4.1.18R, these financial statements form part of the Electronic Format Annual Financial Report filed on the National Storage Mechanism of the FCA in accordance with DTR 4.1.15R – DTR 4.1.18R. This auditor’s report provides no assurance over whether the Electronic Format Annual Financial Report has been prepared in compliance with DTR 4.1.15R – DTR 4.1.18R.

We have been engaged to provide assurance on whether the Electronic Format Annual Financial Report has been prepared in compliance with DTR 4.1.15R – DTR 4.1.18R and will publicly report separately to the members on this.

Ryan Duffy (Senior statutory auditor)
For and on behalf of Deloitte LLP
Statutory Auditor
Birmingham, United Kingdom

7 May 2026