Kenya and Ghana passed full virtual asset laws in 2025. South Africa implemented the Travel Rule through FIC Directive 9. A crypto platform operating in Africa in 2026 with a 2024 compliance plan is not just behind in several markets; it is operating under an entirely different legal framework from the one it built its processes around.

Sub-Saharan Africa received over $205 billion in on-chain value between July 2024 and June 2025, up 52% from the previous year, making it the third-fastest-growing crypto region in the world, according to Chainalysis. The regulatory response to that growth has been equally fast, and the era of operating in a grey zone is over.

This article breaks down what changed in major African markets, what most crypto platforms must do to demonstrate KYC, AML, and Travel Rule compliance in 2026

What Changed Across Africa's Four Biggest Crypto Markets

Between 2025 and early 2026, Nigeria, Kenya, Ghana, and South Africa all moved from informal guidance or ad hoc circulars to binding primary legislation or tightened frameworks.

 Here is what each market now requires:

Nigeria

• The Investments and Securities Act 2025, signed in March 2025, formally classified digital assets as securities under SEC oversight, ending years of regulatory ambiguity.
• VASPs must register with the SEC, meet fit-and-proper tests, and hold significant capital. Under SEC Circular No. 26-1 (January 2026) with a compliance deadline of June 30, 2027.
• The CBN reversed its 2021 banking ban for licensed VASPs reopening banking access that had pushed much of Nigeria's crypto activity into peer-to-peer markets.  In March 2026, the CBN went further, launching an AML/CFT/CPF supervision pilot for selected VASPs

Kenya

• The Virtual Asset Service Providers Act 2025, signed October 2025 and in force from November 4, 2025, introduced mandatory licensing under a dual-regulator model: CBK for payments and stablecoins, Capital Markets Authority for trading and investment.
• KYC and AML requirements are explicitly aligned with FATF standards, requiring blockchain analytics, chain analysis, PEP and sanctions screening, and STR filing to the Financial Reporting Centre.
• Consumer fund segregation is mandatory.
• Penalties for non-compliance reach KES 10 million for individuals.

Ghana

• The Virtual Asset Service Providers Act 2025 (Act 1154), passed December 19, 2025, ended legal uncertainty around crypto in Ghana.
• The Bank of Ghana is the primary licensing authority through the new Virtual Assets Regulatory Office (VARO), operating alongside SEC Ghana and the Financial Intelligence Centre.
• All VASPs serving Ghana residents were required to register by March 5, 2026, with full licensing rolling out in phases through 2026.
• FATF-aligned AML and Travel Rule obligations apply from the point of registration.

South Africa

• The FSCA declared crypto assets as financial products in 2022, bringing all crypto businesses under existing financial services law, with 59+ CASP licenses issued since the framework launched.
• The most significant 2025 development was the Travel Rule implementation through FIC Directive 9, requiring the collection, verification, and transmission of sender and beneficiary data for crypto transfers.
• South Africa was removed from the FATF grey list in October 2025.

Across all four markets, the compliance requirements converge around the same core obligations: licensing, KYC depth, AML programme alignment, and Travel Rule implementation.

Regulatory Changes at a Glance

Why Identity Verification Is at the Centre of Crypto Compliance

Every compliance obligation named above flows back to one question: do you actually know who your users are, and can you prove it? VASP licensing requirements, AML programme alignment, Travel Rule implementation, and PEP and sanctions screening all depend on the quality of the identity verification layer underneath them.

1. Travel Rule requires verified identity on both sides: The Travel Rule requires VASPs to collect, verify, and transmit originator and beneficiary data for crypto transfers above defined thresholds. This is not satisfied by collecting a name and a wallet address. It requires verified identity data that can be shared between VASPs in a format regulators will accept. A KYC process that cannot produce that output does not support Travel Rule compliance.
2. Wallet screening needs identity context to work: Screening wallets against sanctions lists and known illicit addresses produces a result, but without identity data linking a wallet to a verified user, a flagged wallet cannot be connected to an account holder. That limits the platform's ability to report, block, or escalate effectively.
3. KYC depth is now an examination standard: Kenya's VASP Act explicitly requires screening for beneficial ownership, PEPs, and sanctions lists alongside ongoing transaction monitoring. Nigeria's SEC and South Africa's FSCA both examine whether KYC data is connected to ongoing monitoring, not just verified once at signup.

Most African crypto platforms have a KYC process. Fewer have a KYC process that actually connects to everything that compliance now requires it to connect to.

The Compliance Gaps Most African Crypto Platforms Still Have

The regulatory requirements above are clear. The gap for most African crypto platforms is not knowledge of the requirements; it is infrastructure that actually meets them.

• Incomplete Travel Rule implementation: Travel Rule compliance requires a technical stack that can collect, verify, and transmit originator and beneficiary data between VASPs in real time. Most African crypto platforms either have no Travel Rule implementation or have a partial implementation that does not cover all transaction types or counterparty VASP relationships.
• No ongoing wallet screening: Many platforms screen wallets at onboarding and not after. A wallet that was clean at account creation can be linked to illicit activity later, and a platform with no ongoing screening has no mechanism to catch that change until a regulator or correspondent bank surfaces it.
• Point-in-time KYC with no continuous monitoring: KYC completed at onboarding reflects who the user was at signup. It does not reflect behavioural changes, new risk signals, or updated sanctions status in the months and years that follow. Regulators across all four markets are moving toward an expectation of continuous monitoring, not a one-time check.
• No audit trail that holds up under examination: Licensing applications, regulatory examinations, and correspondent banking relationships all require documented evidence of compliance processes. Platforms without a systematic audit trail capturing KYC decisions, screening results, and AML escalations are unable to demonstrate compliance even when the underlying processes exist.

What Staying Compliant Actually Requires

Compliance in 2026 is not a single check at onboarding followed by a filing. It is a set of connected systems that together produce the evidence regulators now require at examination.

• Identity verification across African markets: Verified identity across Nigerian BVN and NIN, Ghanaian Ghana Card, Kenyan national ID, and South African ID systems is the foundation. A platform onboarding users in multiple African markets needs verification coverage across those markets' ID rails, not just one.
• Continuous AML watchlist screening: Sanctions, PEP, and adverse media screening need to run at onboarding and on an ongoing basis as lists update and user circumstances change. A user who was clean at signup may appear on a watchlist six months later.
• Transaction monitoring built for crypto: Standard fintech transaction monitoring rules do not map cleanly onto crypto behaviour. Chain analysis, clustering, and on-chain pattern detection need to sit alongside standard behavioural monitoring to catch the patterns crypto-specific financial crime produces.
• A documented audit trail: Every KYC decision, screening result, and AML escalation needs to be captured in a format that can be produced during a regulatory examination, a licensing application, or a correspondent banking due diligence process. The documentation is the compliance, not just the process behind it.
• Building this across multiple African markets from scratch may be highly expensive. The platforms managing it most efficiently are the ones using infrastructure that covers multiple markets in one integration.

How Dojah's Identity and Trust Infrastructure Supports African Crypto Platforms

The compliance requirements across Nigeria, Kenya, Ghana, and South Africa all depend on the same underlying infrastructure: identity verification connected to AML screening, transaction monitoring, and a documented audit trail.

 Dojah's platform covers each of those layers without requiring a separate vendor stack per market:

• Multi-market identity verification: The ID Verification Widget covers Nigerian BVN and NIN, Ghanaian Ghana Card, Kenyan national ID, South African ID, and broader African markets, so a crypto platform expanding across multiple markets does not need a separate verification vendor for each one.
• Sanctions, PEP, and adverse media screening: Dojah's AML Watchlist runs screening across all three categories in one flow, supporting the ongoing screening obligations under Kenya's VASP Act, Nigeria's SEC requirements, and South Africa's FSCA framework.
• Transaction monitoring for post-onboarding risk: Dojah’s  Easy Detect and Profiled Risk provide the continuous monitoring layer that regulators across all four markets now expect, tracking behavioural and transaction signals across the full account lifecycle rather than stopping at onboarding.
• Audit-ready compliance documentation: Every identity check, screening result, and monitoring alert is logged and retrievable, supporting the audit trail requirements that licensing applications and regulatory examinations require.
   

For African crypto platforms managing compliance obligations across multiple markets simultaneously, Dojah's infrastructure reduces the compliance build required for each new market entry.

See how Dojah helps African crypto platforms verify customers and stay compliant across multiple markets. 

FAQs

1. What are the main crypto compliance requirements in Nigeria in 2026? Nigerian crypto platforms must register with the SEC under the Investments and Securities Act 2025, meet capital requirements of ₦2 billion for exchanges and custodians, implement KYC and AML programmes aligned with SEC standards, and report transactions to the SEC and FIRS for tax purposes.

2. What does Kenya's VASP Act 2025 require from crypto platforms? Kenya's VASP Act 2025 requires mandatory licensing under a dual-regulator model, FATF-aligned KYC and AML processes including PEP and sanctions screening, consumer fund segregation, STR filing to the Financial Reporting Centre, and blockchain analytics. Non-compliance carries penalties of up to KES 10 million or ten years imprisonment.

3. What is the Travel Rule and which African markets require it? The Travel Rule requires VASPs to collect, verify, and transmit sender and beneficiary identity data for crypto transfers above defined thresholds. It is now a compliance requirement across Nigeria, Kenya, Ghana, and South Africa, with South Africa having implemented it through FIC Directive 9.

4. What is the difference between point-in-time KYC and continuous monitoring? Point-in-time KYC verifies a user's identity at onboarding but does not track changes afterward. Continuous monitoring tracks behavioural signals, transaction patterns, and watchlist updates throughout the customer relationship, which is what regulators across all four markets now expect.