ICASA, DoC versus the VANS

doc not liking it cause they can't control it
 
“the minister has said it was never her intention to follow a ‘big bang’ approach to the liberalisation of the telecoms market. Rather, it had consistently followed a ‘managed liberalisation’ approach, of gradually freeing up the market.”

Says it all!:(
 
well if you look at it from the point that the govt owns 30% + of all the current players that are allowed self provisioning, of course they arent going to want the vans who they have no stake in to be allowed sellf provision rights. they would lose too much cash that way. its all about making the high ranking anc blokes a bit of extra cash after all.

on a side note, bearing in mind the track record of the courts when it comes to cases involving Telkom, i wouldnt hold my breath that altech even stands a snowball in hells chance of winning
 
friedpiggy said:
well if you look at it from the point that the govt owns 30% + of all the current players that are allowed self provisioning, of course they arent going to want the vans who they have no stake in to be allowed sellf provision rights. they would lose too much cash that way. its all about making the high ranking anc blokes a bit of extra cash after all.

on a side note, bearing in mind the track record of the courts when it comes to cases involving Telkom, i wouldnt hold my breath that altech even stands a snowball in hells chance of winning
Click to expand...

The wording "VANS may self-provide facilities from 1 February 2005" is however rather clear cut, and here Matsepe-Casaburri's lawyers said that the wording in the ministerial directive was "unfortunate".
Click to expand...

This part gives me a little bubble of hope. There is no way to get around that, she said what she said.
 
friedpiggy said:
on a side note, bearing in mind the track record of the courts when it comes to cases involving Telkom, i wouldnt hold my breath that altech even stands a snowball in hells chance of winning
Click to expand...
imho if the court applies the law then the right of VANS to self-provide will be recognised - it is to the extent that politics becomes involved that there is a problem

this is one of the more accurate article on the issue, but a few comments:

If Altech is successful it may see all VANS licence holders receiving Individual ECNS licences giving them the same rights as operators such as Telkom, Neotel, Vodacom and MTN.

Should this occur it will result in a sudden liberalisation of the telecoms industry. The legal action may, however, hold up of the already slow licence conversion process, something which has got many players hot under the collar.

Some ISPs, including Internet Solutions and Vox Telecom, have criticised Altech, hoping that the court action will be dismissed.
Click to expand...

the bolded bit is simply not true - bear with me here

in September 2007 the Minister issued another set of directives. One of these called for a ICASA to launch a competitive process to see which, if any, VANS should be converted to IECNS licences.

Unfortunately the Minister once again screwed it up royally. ICASA looked at the directive and decided that it meant that a competitive process for only existing VANS should be designed and they duly did so.

Since October 2007 about 30 or so VANS have spent a great deal of time and money participating in this process and dealing with ICASA's often ridiculous demands (such as you must have 100% coverage of the country within 6 months :rolleyes:) and without the actually telling anyone what the cost of the licence would be.

In the court papers in the Altech matter, however, the Minister once again clarified her policy directive to say that what she actually intended was for ICASA to issue out an Invitation to Apply (ITA) inviting anyone who wanted to apply for an IECNS.

Let's be clear: there is no ways that a reasonable person would ever have interpreted her policy direction as meaning this. She simply had to reference the correct section of the Act and there would have been no confusion.

Deja vu 2004 and self-provision? Damn right....

What is the position now? In its court papers ICASA said that they had now been told by the Minister what her "true intention" was and that they therefore recognised that the competitive process which they had been following was incorrect and that they would now have to issue an ITA. They are now waiting for the clarification of the applicable licence fees from the Minister and the DG so that they can do this.

Fact: the delays in the licence conversion process with regard to VANS and potentially opening up the market are not due to Altech's court action but due to the Minister's incompetence. There are many within ICASA who recognise this.

IS & Vox know this.

Fact: ICASA asked for and received a legal opinion from a senior telecomms specialist in Jan 2008 as to whether VANS could self-provide. They were told in this opinion that their regulations which prevented VANS from self-providing (actually the Minister's regulations) were unlawful but would remain in force until they were challenged.

Well now they are being challenged and the question becomes why is ICASA fighting them when it has already received top legal advice that it is wasting its time in doing so.

Easy answer: the Minister controls them.

It is not so much ICASA and the DoC "fighting back", rather just the DoC. And it is VANS which are fighting back against incompetence and mismanaged liberalisation.

Despite the court action and licensing delays, ICASA continues to actively police the airways and has shown its teeth recently.
Click to expand...

truth be told they do not really have the manpower, equipment and expertise to do so. the unlawful warrant is a prime example. Despite the continual ravings of iBurst and others there is not a single wisp which has been shut down since 1 Feb 2005 to the best of my knowledge.

Delays forcing self-provisioning?

Some industry players feel that ICASA’s delay in the licence conversion process and allocating spectrum to additional Individual ECNS licensees is forcing companies to start building their own wireless networks in unlicensed frequency bands to serve customers.
Click to expand...

some industry players have been sleeping for the past 2.5 years....

It has also long been the position of the Wireless Access Providers Associations (WAPA) that all VANS are allowed to self-provide as long as these providers use unlicensed spectrum.
Click to expand...
unlicensed spectrum has little to do with self-provision (which covers any kind of facility) but this has obviously been the most attractive medium where self-provision can be used in SA by a VANS

personally i believe the time has come for industry to realise that the central stuff-up here and just about everywhere flows from the Minister's office and that we need to be far more vocal about the fact that we would like a new Min who is able to express her intention on paper the first time round asap

dominic
 
Great comments - thanks Dominic!

Do you know by any chance when we can expect a ruling on this issue?
 
rpm said:
Do you know by any chance when we can expect a ruling on this issue?
Click to expand...
the judge seemed fairly confident that he would get something out within 2 weeks of the 31st July but there really is no telling

will be a very interesting time whichever way it goes
 
wicked. thanks for the breakdown there Dominic. nice to get a legal eagles perspective on the whole lot.
 
All this confusion and mayhem and it is all the DOC fault.
Surely now it's time to fire "look like me" Poison Ivy?

I love that way that IS is using non ICASA approved equipment, while at the same time throwing mud at Altech. Bwaaahahahaha, and are now pulling the corrupt official sidestep of "your process in busting me was incorrect".

Mutch sickness in the allround.

I think the ultimate victim, the potential and current customer is being ignored once again.

IVY! Wake up dammit, or resign.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X