[Kictanet] Day 4 of 10: What are the Existing/Sugested legalandregulatory framework for OFC?

Sat Jan 27 19:52:18 EAT 2007

Walu,

I dug this interesting read  off google search a while back (78 page)

Open Access Models
Options for Improving Backbone Access in Developing
Countries (with a Focus on Sub-Saharan Africa)
Final Draft
August 2005
An infoDev Technical Report
prepared by
S P I N T R A C K A B
DROTTNINGGATAN 99,
113 60 STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN
PHONE: +46-8-528 00 310 FAX: +46-8-528 00 315
WWW.SPINTRACK.COM INFO at SPINTRACK.COM

< http://www.infodev.org/files/2569_file_OPEN_ACCESS_REPORT.pdf >

/Alex

John Walubengo <jwalu at yahoo.com> wrote: Found an answer to my own question <
talked about emailing instead of talking to oneself?>>  -
anyway...The proposed regulatory framework for EASsy (which
purportedly is going the Open Access way) seems to be
covered here....  

~~~~00-copied below---

East Africa: EASSy Project Model Approved      
Thursday, 22 June 2006  
All countries participating in the development of the East
African Sub Marine Cable System (EASSy) have now agreed to
implement the project on an 'open access basis,' overcoming
a hurdle that had initially threatened to derail the
project. 
The Policy and Regulatory Adviser of Nepad e-Africa
Commission, Dr Edmund Katiti said that the South African
government and Nepad's ICT experts had persuaded the
countries that were objecting to the change in the project
to realise the limitations of the consortium model which
they had preferred.

The EASSy project involves laying of a fibre optic cable
from Mtunzini north of Durban, through landing stations
along East Africa to Port Sudan. The cable will link with
the countries' national networks at the landing stations.
Others would subsequently be interconnected through the
networks of landlocked countries like Uganda, Rwanda,
Burundi and D.R Congo.

When the project was first conceived, it was to be
primarily a private sector project. The core investors in
the cable infrastructure would determine the retail prices
of bandwidth. The project was to be owned and operated by a
group of companies that would generate financing; an
arrangement known as the consortium model. The South
African government and Nepad have recently argued that the
consortium model would not achieve the objective of the
project – bringing down the costs of communication in
the region. They suggested that the model be altered to
"open access", where any operator or institution in the
participating countries would be allowed to acquire equity
if it can afford the agreed contribution.

In the open access model, the cable would be owned and
operated by the Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV), a company
created to manage the network and establish the price of
bandwidth. An Intergovernmental Assembly is to be formed to
regulate the costs that the SPV would charge operators.
Rwanda will host the headquarters of the SPV in part as
recognition of their commitment to the development and
promotion of ICTs in the country.

After the agreement reached earlier in June, the Nepad
e-Africa Commission is working towards the signing of a
protocol that would form the legal framework of the EASSy
project. The Commission has already prepared a project
plan, which it has sent to the member governments to review
and comment, a process that take until August, when the
protocol signing is anticipated. Construction is expected
to commence by the end of 2006.

Katiti said they hope to raise a quarter of the funding
from equity acquisition payments by companies from the
region and then raise the remainder from African financial
institutions: African Development Bank, Comesa's PTA Bank,
East African Development Bank and others.

Source: The Monitor - WDR/Intelecon Regulatory News 
http://www.regulateonline.org/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=780&Itemid=32&relaItemid=877

walu.

--- John Walubengo  wrote:

> What form/level of regulation would be required? Eric
> plse
> on Open Access, plse elaborate maybe in three paragraphs.
> And maybe also Kai would have a comment on Regulation
> with
> regard to a Private sector submarine OFC
> provisioning....oh
> yes, Kihanya (the learned one) may have a point too...
> 
> 
> walu.
> nb: Govt officials are also encouraged to say something -
> members are informed to treat their comments as their
> personal and not official postions ;-).
> 
> --- Lucy Kimani  wrote:
> 
> > Regulation is definately required as even the big boys
> of
> > the west are
> > regulated, in a capitalistic environment (read
> > cat-throat) self-regulation
> > has not worked, and is sure a recipe for disaster.
> > 
> > LK
> > > OK. Looks like Fridays are still fridays -even
> online.
> > Very
> > > little activity. Heard from only Harry and Alex...is
> > there
> > > anyone out there still logged on to give us their
> views
> > b/w
> > > now and 2morrow.
> > >
> > > walu.
> > > --- Harry Hare  wrote:
> > >
> > >> Dear Walu,
> > >>
> > >> Just checked the dictionary definition of "Regulate"
> > and
> > >> got these synonyms
> > >> - rule, govern, manage, order, adjust, arrange,
> > dispose,
> > >> conduct,
> > >> systematize. Al these sound and are good "English"
> > words
> > >> cos they give you
> > >> the sense of stability, odder and continuity.
> However,
> > >> these may not be so
> > >> good "legal" words because law introduces the
> concept
> > of
> > >> constrain. Then
> > >> these words become a burden that regulation is
> > >> (especially to the private
> > >> sector) and that regulatory frameworks prescribe.
> > >>
> > >> On the same breath, I would argue that its not a
> > simple
> > >> lets have or no,
> > >> lets not regulate the OFCs. I think we need to
> > regulate
> > >> in the sense of
> > >> providing continuity by systematizing and managing
> for
> > >> the benefit of all,
> > >> so regulation should only be used to facilitate and
> > not
> > >> constrain.
> > >> Non-regulation to me sounds chaotic and not
> > sustainable
> > >> in the long run!
> > >>
> > >> Lets have a "facilitative regulatory framework" so
> > that
> > >> the private sector
> > >> can do what they do best...invest and get a return
> on
> > >> their investment; and
> > >> the government collects its taxes while we enjoy
> > >> efficient and affordable
> > >> the services!
> > >>
> > >> Harry
> > >>
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From:
> > >>
> kictanet-bounces+harry=aitecafrica.com at kictanet.or.ke
> > >>
> > >
> >
>
[mailto:kictanet-bounces+harry=aitecafrica.com at kictanet.or.ke]
> > >> On Behalf Of
> > >> John Walubengo
> > >> Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 9:40 AM
> > >> To: harry at aitecafrica.com
> > >> Subject: [Kictanet] Day 4 of 10: What are the
> > >> Existing/Sugested legal
> > >> andregulatory framework for OFC?
> > >>
> > >> Thanx Brain, Kai, et al for your contributions on
> the
> > >> previous themes, I now wish to introduce today's
> theme
> > as
> > >> shown above.
> > >>
> > >> It looks like on the Regulatory theme, there is very
> > >> little
> > >> option.  The choice is simply between having or NOT
> > >> having
> > >> Regulatory environments for the submarine cable. 
> The
> > >> current practice is simply NO Regulation by virtue
> of
> > the
> > >> fact that most OFC is laid out by Private sector
> with
> > >> commercially agreed private contracts.  These are
> kept
> > >> confidential until or unless a dispute arises in
> which
> > >> case
> > >> it is resolved through existing Company Laws or
> > >> Competition
> > >> Laws. None-Regulation has therefore served well in
> > >> managing
> > >> Private sector investements.
> > >>
> > >> However, in the Case of a Consortium model, where
> > Public
> > >> Funds have been committed to build the
> infrastructure,
> > >> some
> > >> argue that Regulation is required to ensure that the
> > >> Public
> > >> interest (social benefits) are balanced against the
> > >> Private (profit) interests.  The Consortium
> operators
> > >> however find this recommendation not encouraging
> since
> > >> they
> > >> feel that Regulation would tend to frustrate an
> > otherwise
> > >> enterprising venture that would excel without
> > Regulatory
> > >> constraints.
> > >>
> > >> As for the proposed Open Access Model, the
> Regulatory
> > >> frameworks suggested seem to range from None, Some,
> > >> Delayed
> > >> to Full Regulation.  I still don't know how these
> > >> different
> > >> variants would apply but would be glad to hear more
> > from
> > >> the participants.  So lets explore the Pros and Cons
> > of
> > >> these options but approaching it in a practical way
> as
> > >> follows:
> > >>
> > >> What benefits/disadvantages has Non-Regulation
> brought
> > to
> > >> submarine OFC within the the context of the three
> > models
> > >>  a) Purely Private Provisioning of OFC
> > >>  b) Consortium Provisioning of OFC
> > >>  c) Open Access Provisionig of OFC.
> > >>
> > >> 2Days discussion - the eFloor is open to all
> however.
> > >> Operators, Lawyers, Regulators, Policy Makers, CSO &
> > >> Consumers are particularly encouraged to say
> > something.
> > >>
> > >> walu.
> > >> --- Bill Kagai  wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Brian...
> > >> > Signs of a good Cabaret Sauvignon over lunch
> > today!!!
> > >> >
> > >> > Anyway,
> > >> > We are all converted capitalists hosting the World
> > >> Social
> > >> > Forum..so I say..a
> > >> > good model is the one that makes good money for
> all
> > of
> > >> > us.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On 1/25/07, Brian Longwe 

> wrote:
> > >> > >
> 
=== message truncated ===

____________________________________________________________________________________
Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection. 
Try the free Yahoo! Mail Beta.
http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/features_spam.html

_______________________________________________
kictanet mailing list
kictanet at kictanet.or.ke
http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet

Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/alex.gakuru%40yahoo.com

---------------------------------
Need Mail bonding?
Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20070127/fd618719/attachment.htm>