'Set of standards needed for good Net governance'

The forum at Chulalongkorn University’s Faculty of Communication Arts was joined by public telecommunications regulators, Internet Service Providers (ISP) and NGOs. They discussed the possible shape of Internet governance in Thailand and many expressed concern.

Sarinee Achavanuntakul, representative from the Thai Netizen Network, an Internet watchdog, pointed out that Internet governance was essential to cope with today’s fast-changing online world. She cited the reality of the Internet of Things (IoT), a scenario in which many objects were equipped with the ability to transfer data over the network, as a key agenda that would transform the IT landscape and require a standard of governance.

“It is estimated that by 2020, there’ll be 50 billion devices under IoT criteria. That’s a serious amount of connectivity,” she said, adding the government should participate more in facilitating online industries and help shape IT law and make it more tangible.

ISP should also offer support, as they are the biggest digital actors in controlling all Internet traffic flow, said the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commissioner Supinya Klangnarong. She cited another technical term – ‘Internet neutrality’ – a principle that ISPs and governments should treat all online data equally.

“We haven’t had much progress on IT legislation so far, as we are still unable to define what ‘net neutrality’ should be in a Thai context.” she said.

Internet governance could possibly be developed ‘naturally’ through an IT market mechanism, Anan Ratchatamuttha from Advanced Info Service, an Internet provider, claimed – “because real players know it best, so we together can create norms that understand the nature of the IT world the most”.

Telephone Organization of Thailand’s representative Rungsun Channarukul called for a principle of fairness – that customers should have fair access to data and be able to obtain it at a fair price, as well as complying with fair regulations. 

Thana Tangsitphakdi from CAT Telecom suggested “vibrant, dynamic” IT regulations “as the world always keeps changing, so perhaps fixed rules may not work with this case”.

Pichit Kaewmakoon of DTAC, another Internet provider firm, expressed doubts on how to set a standard for customer prioritisation in the currently tangled Internet traffic.

“Should customers who pay more be given the ‘fast lane’, a higher Internet speed that may exploit other customers’ channels? It is still being questioned as to how we’re going to define the term ‘fairness’, and eventually the term ‘neutrality’.”

Wasu Khunwasi from True Internet, another private Internet provider, thought cultural and social factors would play a part in defining what constituted Internet neutrality.

The forum was also organised by the Southeast Asian Press Alliance, Thai Netizen Network and iLaw.