By APC & others JOHANNESBURG, South Africa,
Published onPage last updated on
Joint statement by participants at a SAT3/WASC/SAFE workshop in Johannesburg
We, as African regulators, policy advisors, operators, businesspeople, civil society delegates, and consumer lobby groups, amongst others gathered to discuss the issue of Africa’s access to international fibre connectivity at the Indaba Hotel in Fourways, Johannesburg, on 24th and 25th July 2006 acknowledge that:
• African citizens do not have sufficient access to affordable bandwidth to meet the continent’s economic and development needs;
• In the past, regional ICT infrastructure projects have been developed without suitable policy and regulatory frameworks in place and have failed to produce the desired developmental impact;
• Affordable access is crucial for economic growth and global economic competitiveness, education, health and for the delivery of efficient government services;
• In principle, telecommunications monopolies are not in the public interest and do not result in affordable access for the citizens of a country or region;
• Increased competition is likely to be one of the biggest drivers in bringing down the cost of connectivity for consumers. However, this needs to happen within an appropriate policy and regulatory framework that takes into account local market conditions, and also takes into account the absence of competition in the ownership or access to international gateways in many African countries;
• Regulators should be empowered to regulate the market against anti-competitive behaviour and in favour of the public interest.
Also recognizing the urgency with which the regulatory position on the ending of the national SAT3/WASC/SAFE (SAT3) exclusivity period needs to be clarified, we believe that:
• To encourage the full and proper adoption of broadband access so that its competitive, economic and developmental potential can be realized, SAT3 prices must come down significantly and ultimately be aligned with costs;
• Any future regulatory decision regarding SAT3 should be in the interests of the industry as a whole and the African consumer rather than in the sole interests of any single operator or consortium of operators;
• Transparency on issues such as pricing and good corporate governance are essential to any arrangement concerning the future of SAT3 once the period of national exclusivity expires;
• Landing facilities are essential national and regional resources and should be regulated in a fair, transparent and non-discriminatory manner;
• The SAT3 consortium needs to publicly state what its intentions are regarding the future of the cable and its remaining capacity;
• The role of the state and the regulator needs to be clearly defined in any decision-making process regarding the future of SAT3;
• The positions of landlocked countries, countries without landing stations, and those that were not able to invest in SAT3 due to various constraints need to be properly understood before any decision on the future of SAT3 is made;
• The necessity for regional collaboration between regulators and regional regulatory authorities needs to be recognized and supported;
• It would be beneficial to draw on the policy framework developed for the NEPAD ICT Broadband Infrastructure Network for Eastern and Southern Africa, including the submarine EASSY cable, to inform how regulators and policy makers address SAT3;
• African countries need to commit to legislation that prohibits future exclusionary arrangements (such as those seen in SAT3), in the interest of ICT development and economic growth.
More specifically, based on the understanding that where monopolies exist regulators should regulate price and access in the public interest, we recommend that the following items be considered:
• An interest group of regulators be formed so that information can be shared between regulators and a common pricing methodology be developed;
• All licensed operators should have the right to purchase capacity from any current or future owners of capacity;
• Regulators (or, if appropriate, government) should prescribe regulations to govern the access to this capacity;
• Regulation governing all landing stations should abide by the principle of equal and fair competition;
• With reference to the work already carried out by NEPAD, regulation for international cross-border infrastructure needs to be developed at a regional level through the collaboration of regional regulatory bodies and authorities.
July 25th, 2006
