Cimas under investigation over 'anti-competitive' conduct

The Competition and Tariff Commission has launched an investigation into Cimas Medical Aid Society following allegations of anti-competitive conduct raised by Belnash Investments.

The complaint centres on claims that Cimas refused to register Belnash's Harvey Brown Pharmacy on its direct payment system, effectively forcing Cimas members to pay cash for prescriptions at the pharmacy because medical aid cards are not accepted there. Belnash alleges that other comparable service providers are already registered on the same system, raising concerns about selective exclusion.

The Commission has indicated that its investigation will examine whether Cimas is deliberately excluding the pharmacy in order to steer members toward its own healthcare facilities, including its clinic and dispensary. It warned that such conduct, if proven, could restrict consumer choice and create unfair barriers for independent healthcare providers.

In a notice published in the Government Gazette, the CTC said it has preliminary concerns that the alleged practices may limit competition and impede the expansion of independent providers. However, it stressed that the opening of an investigation does not imply wrongdoing.

"The commission will… conduct an investigation to establish whether the alleged practice directly or indirectly restricts competition," it said.

If confirmed, the conduct could amount to a breach of Section 28 of the Competition Act.

The probe comes amid broader policy debates in Zimbabwe's healthcare sector, where there is growing pressure on medical aid societies to divest from owning healthcare facilities. Proposed reforms under the Medical Services (Medical Aid Societies) Amendment aim to separate funders from service providers, effectively banning "vertical integration."

If enacted, the changes would require medical aid societies to focus solely on financing healthcare, while independent providers deliver services—reversing long-standing provisions under Statutory Instrument 330 of 2000, which allows medical aid societies to invest in and operate healthcare facilities with minimal oversight.

Critics argue that the current model allows dominant players to control the healthcare value chain, while proponents of reform say separation would improve fairness, transparency, and competition in the sector.

The outcome of the Cimas investigation is likely to have wider implications for how medical aid societies operate in Zimbabwe's evolving regulatory landscape.