Trai Extends Olive Branch To Govt
The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) yesterday hinted that it may clear the governments Internet policy and the entry of Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd (MTNL) into cellular services if it was approached for recommendations on the issues. On Tuesday, TRAI had ruled against MTNLs cellular foray and declared the Internet policy invalid.
If the government accepts the olive branch extended by the telecom regulator, the impasse over the Internet policy and MTNLs entry into cellular services may be resolved.
This would be a welcome relief to the company, whose scrip has been hammered on fears that the company would renege on international commitments made by it at the time of its GDR offering.
In an interview with Business Standard, TRAI chairperson S S Sodhi said: Our judgement did not go into the merits of the (Internet) policy or MTNLs cellular plans. All that we have stressed is that it is mandatory for the government to have our recommendations. If it approaches us, we will look into the merits (of the proposals) and make recommendations.
There are a lot of uncertainties in the case. If the matter goes to courts first, to a single-bench, then to a twin bench in a high court and then the Supreme Court the delays could be adverse for the country. The new government should decide on the issues; after all, this can be easily resolved by them, the chief telecom regulator added.
The department of telecom (the countrys telecom policy-maker and incumbent operator) and MTNL are now mulling their options. While there is a strong move to appeal against the TRAI in a high court or the Supreme Court, sources did not rule out a rapprochement move on part of the government. Department of telecommunications brass and MTNL chairman S Rajagopalan were closeted in meetings until late last evening.
At the receiving end of stinging criticism over the decision to invalidate the Internet policy, Sodhi sought to defend the TRAI ruling. When we read press reports as far back as November, we wrote to the government asking what the policy was all about. We asked for a copy of the Jalan Committee report so that we could give them (DoT officials) our views, Sodhi recounted.
It was only in January that we were informed of the guidelines of the policy. Then, we were told that the Jalan Committee report was confidential and could not be given to us. We are a regulatory body, not the public. We had not asked for any cabinet note, only the committee report. Then, why the secrecy? he wanted to know.
The regulator stressed that the move to bar MTNLs entry into cellular services was not anti-competitive. Seeking to reassure investors and telecom service customers,
Sodhi also emphasised the transparent functioning of TRAI.
The best safeguard against stumbling into errors is the public consultative process we adopt. The more we discuss issues, the better the output will be; unlike the culture of taking decisions behind closed doors.