Sepo doubts legal grounds over NBTC interim measures
The National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission might lack the legal grounds to support its measure permitting TrueMove and Digital Phone Co (DPC) to continue serving their customers for one more year after their concessions ended in September
Sepo, meanwhile, doubts whether the interim measure amounts to an extension of the companies’ concession period.
The office submitted its opinion to the NBTC in August as part of the watchdog’s public-hearing process on the interim measure. However, the hearing had already ended in July.
Citing the need to prevent service disruption, the NBTC introduced the measure in August to allow both cellular operators to continue serving their customers for an interim period of one year after their concessions ended in September.
Many parties have questioned whether the NBTC’s interim measure is tantamount to extending the companies’ concession period, but the watchdog has always denied that this is the case.
The NBTC telecom committee considered Sepo’s opinion yesterday, but panel member Suthiphon Thaveechaiyagarn said the opinion had come too late, as the NBTC had already launched the interim measure in August.
He reaffirmed that the NBTC had the right to introduce the measure in order to protect consumers.
Last week, the NBTC and CAT Telecom testified at the Central Administrative Court, following CAT’s court filing against the interim measure.
Suthiphon said the NBTC had clarified with the court that it had to protect consumers following the expiration of the TrueMove and DPC concession contracts.
Damages claim
CAT had filed a damages claim on October 16 against NBTC’s interim measure at the court in regard to three issues.
First, it sought a court ruling to terminate the measure, which it considers to be negatively affecting its business.
Second, CAT requested the court to ask the Constitution Court to rule on whether the NBTC had the authority to reclaim spectra from state agencies for reallocation.
In this respect, CAT considers Article 84 (4) of the Frequency Allocation Act to run counter to Article 47 of the Constitution. The frequency law requires state agencies to return spectra to the NBTC, but the Constitution merely says the NBTC can manage spectra.
Third, CAT claimed damages as high as Bt275 billion from the NBTC.
On this point, it considers the NBTC resolution that TrueMove and DPC do not have to transfer their existing customers to CAT to be against the concession contracts.
The plaintiff said the damages amount was based on the assumption that without the NBTC’s measure, all TrueMove and DPC cellular customers would have been taken care of by CAT.
