Consumers groups seek Inspector General's investigation
Play
The Federation of Consumer Organisations today seeks the Inspector General's involvement in the Euro 2012 broadcasting feud, asking it to investigate if the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission has fully complied with laws.
The federation, led by Saree Ongsomwang - secretary general of the Foundation for Consumers, today submitted a request to the Inspector General's Office. It questioned if the broadcasting regulator has appropriately compiled with the law, following the inability to get pass-through broadcasting of the tournament to all consumers.
Earlier, the federation which covered 302 consumer groups asked the NBTC to order Channels 3, 5, and 9 to rebroadcast the matches.
In the request, the federation said that the regulator did not follow the Constitution and related laws as well as the broadcasting master plan. At least 10 million households could not get the broadcasting signa. All members of the commission are named, but a minority commissioner - Supinya Klangnarong.
The federation highlighted 7 points which may show the NBTC's lack of compliance.
1. It may have violated the Constitution's Section 47 which specifies fair and level-playing field competition for public services.
2. It may have violated broadcasting laws, by not taking actions against Channels 3, 5 and 9, as the laws demand protection of consumers' rights.
3. It may have violated broadcasting laws, by not taking action against GMM Grammy (the Uefa-appointed broadcasting right holder). The laws demand actions against any company which upholds financial gains above consumers' benefits.
4. NBTC could have ordered Channels 3, 5 and 9 to stop any action which takes advantage of consumers and ordered the broadcasting of the matches through all platforms.
5. As Channels 3, 5 and 9 stop public services in some platforms, this is against the broadcasting master plan. Moreover, it is apparent that the public broadcasters did not inform the NBTC of the programming changes, though required to do so.
6. Whether the NBTC has complied with the laws to ensure no monopoly in the broadcasting field, as broadcasting in some platforms not all is blocking free competition?
7. The NBTC may have failed to monitor CAT Telecom, which is in charge of the transmission of such signal. CAT Telecom's handling of the transmission benefits some private operators and limit consumers' access to public services.
