No collusion needed because of NBTC 'incompetence'
The Ombudsman will ask the Administrative Court to determine if the 3G auction was conducted in a free and fair manner, which says that distribution of frequencies must maximise benefits to the public and be carried out with public participation.
I agree with the Ombudsman that the auction failed to generate genuine price competition because two of the three firms did not increase their bids. However, I agree with Colonel Settapong Malisuwan, chair of the NBTC’s telecom committee, that no collusion took place – for in a one-horse race, who needs to collude?
And a one-horse race is essentially what we had, for the NBTC’s competence was such that we had three bidders for three basically identical prizes, and no bidder could win more than 15 megahertz of spectrum, with a total of 45MHz up for grabs.
The NBTC should have required that the number of bidders be greater than the number of awards available, and/or made the awards significantly unequal in value. If doing so would mean that, for example, foreigners would hold a majority of a given bidder, then the NBTC should have protected against specific acts that would damage national interests while allowing ownership to be nationality-blind.
Find new and competent NBTC members, insulate them from political interference and re-hold the auction. Since so much time’s been lost on 3G and there’s no technological reason requiring 3G before moving up to 4G, let’s leapfrog to 4G.
Burin Kantabutra
Bangkok
