Extract from an article by Ferial Haffajee in the <i>Mail & Guardian</i> of 14 May, in an interview with copliance didivision manager Zodwa Ntuli of the Competition Commission (with due and specific acknowledgments, no plagiaristic intent, and in the interests of the public good):
<i>..Telkom launched a High Court action against the commission, saying it did not havre the capacity to fine the company R3,7-billion for anti-competitive bandwidth policies. Telkom argued that the only regulator who can do so is the Independent Communication Authority of South Africa (Icasa). Your response?</i>
<font color="blue">"We will wait to hear what the High Court says. Icasa has jurisdiction to deal with competitive matters, but the Competition Act creates concurrent jurisidiction - it means we can look at competition matters across all sectors and that we can investigate any matter that relates to competition. We'll continue doing that and we will investigate any sector.
The Competition Act created a new framework, which means we can investigate, the Competition Tribunal is the only court that can decide on the merits of competitive issues. Any decision that people are not satisfied with can only be appealed to the Competition Appeal Court - another specialised court."</font id="blue">
Past uncertainties posted in this forum about the apparent dichotomy between the two regulators, should now be cleared up - it's clear that ICASA rules on contraventions and compliancy issues regarding the Telecomms Act, but the Competition Commission can still whack anybody who engages in anti-competitive behaviour, be it collusion, price-fixing, and so on (I just love the ruling against Toyota!).
Typically, Telkrap will litigate until the cows come home, but at the end of the day, it will remain proven that they have abused their position regarding bandwidth provision. Their stance is clearly also in direct conflict with their public service mandate, and in the meantime, comsumer revenues are being used to fund this litigation, abeit indirectly. Fire all their strategic management and operational decision-makers!!!
[
!][!][!]
<i>..Telkom launched a High Court action against the commission, saying it did not havre the capacity to fine the company R3,7-billion for anti-competitive bandwidth policies. Telkom argued that the only regulator who can do so is the Independent Communication Authority of South Africa (Icasa). Your response?</i>
<font color="blue">"We will wait to hear what the High Court says. Icasa has jurisdiction to deal with competitive matters, but the Competition Act creates concurrent jurisidiction - it means we can look at competition matters across all sectors and that we can investigate any matter that relates to competition. We'll continue doing that and we will investigate any sector.
The Competition Act created a new framework, which means we can investigate, the Competition Tribunal is the only court that can decide on the merits of competitive issues. Any decision that people are not satisfied with can only be appealed to the Competition Appeal Court - another specialised court."</font id="blue">
Past uncertainties posted in this forum about the apparent dichotomy between the two regulators, should now be cleared up - it's clear that ICASA rules on contraventions and compliancy issues regarding the Telecomms Act, but the Competition Commission can still whack anybody who engages in anti-competitive behaviour, be it collusion, price-fixing, and so on (I just love the ruling against Toyota!).
Typically, Telkrap will litigate until the cows come home, but at the end of the day, it will remain proven that they have abused their position regarding bandwidth provision. Their stance is clearly also in direct conflict with their public service mandate, and in the meantime, comsumer revenues are being used to fund this litigation, abeit indirectly. Fire all their strategic management and operational decision-makers!!!
[
!][!][!]