Changes in network value chain, licensing policies raise crucial questions

Internet Service Providers Association of Bangladesh (ISPAB) President Aminul Hakim raised an important question at a recent seminar organised by the Telecom and Technology Reporters Network Bangladesh (TRNB). The event was held on July 12 at a hotel in Dhaka. I was in the audience section, and tried to listen to and understand everyone’s speech throughout the event. Among the questions raised at the seminar, to me, Aminul Hakim’s question was the most important—yet it went unanswered.

Neither the event’s chief guest Faiz Ahmad Taiyeb, special assistant to the Chief Adviser on Posts, Telecommunications, and ICT, nor BTRC Chairman Major General (Retd) Md Emdad Ul Bari and Acting Secretary of the Posts and Telecommunications Division Zahirul Islam offered a response.

The question was, as the ILDTS policy of the telecommunications sector is being amended, will it remain in effect under the next political government? Or will it be scrapped and rewritten once again? If telecom policies keep changing with every political shift, how can either local or foreign investors feel secure about long-term investments?

This question is important because in the past, we have seen major changes in key state policies whenever the government has changed in Bangladesh. Even during the tenure of the ousted Awami League government, the same government repeatedly changed policies. In some cases, decisions passed in Parliament as part of the national budget were overturned within a month by administrative orders.

For this reason, the question of whether the new “Telecommunications Network and Licensing Policy 2025” initiated by the current interim government to change the licensing system at various levels of network infrastructure in the telecommunications sector will remain in force during the next elected government’s tenure is highly significant. Already, the BNP, the largest political party among the current political forces in the country, has expressed concern at a central press conference over this policy change. Therefore, the question raised by the ISPAB president is indeed extremely important.

Another important question was raised by multiple speakers at the seminar. It was: how logical is it to initiate changes in the network value chain and licensing policy without first updating the national telecommunications policy and telecommunications law in a timely manner? Because the network value chain and licensing policy is a part of the national telecommunications policy. At the same time, it should ideally be determined by telecommunications law. But without completing these two major reforms, why has it suddenly become urgent to change just a partial segment of policy—this question has already been raised by various stakeholders in the telecommunications sector.

At the seminar, the Special Assistant to the Chief Adviser stated that all policies implemented under the former “authoritarian” Awami League regime would be scrapped. He emphasised that in the new Bangladesh following the July uprising, new policies would be formulated in line with new times. The national telecommunications policy and telecommunications law would also be amended or changed. That sounds promising, but he did not clarify why the network value chain and licensing policy is being changed before changing the law and national policy.

Another important question arises here. If everything of the former authoritarian government is to be scrapped, then why did the Special Assistant to the Chief Adviser write a letter to the ACC Chairman just a few days ago, requesting the release of funds for a project initiated during the fascist government’s term under BTCL? Several media outlets have reported on the ongoing ACC investigation into this project. In response, Special Assistant to the Chief Adviser Faiz Ahmad Taiyeb explained his position at a press conference. He clearly stated that continuing the project was necessary to strengthen BTCL.

So, what does this statement prove? Even a project under investigation for corruption during the former authoritarian government’s tenure must be continued considering national interest. Then how logical is it to declare that everything from that former government must be scrapped?

This is the reality. A policy or structure that has been running in a state for many years cannot simply be thrown away at will. The former authoritarian government weakened nearly every key state policy and structure through misuse. But the stark reality is that the business, commerce, investment and service infrastructure built upon those policies cannot be changed without starting from the top—not from the bottom. That is why the student leadership that led the July uprising has been demanding a “July Charter” from the very beginning.

The Chief Adviser has already formed several national-level commissions for reforming key state issues. Based on the recommendations of these reform commissions, the government has formed a National Consensus Commission to ensure significant reforms. The commission is working on drafting a national charter. This is the proper process. In reforming the telecommunications sector, that rational process has not been followed.

What was needed first was the formation of a national commission for reforming the telecommunications sector. If that commission had reviewed the existing national telecommunications policy, telecommunications law, and other policies to formulate a set of recommendations, and then based on those, the initiative to change the network value chain and licensing policy had been taken, there would be no questions or debate. It is true that changing the network value chain and licensing policy falls under the jurisdiction of the telecommunications regulatory agency BTRC.

At the TRNB seminar, the BTRC chairman quite justifiably said that the ILDTS policy formulated 15 years ago was necessary in the context of that time. In the present context, changing this policy is absolutely essential. I fully agree with him. Because times have changed, and there has been a major technological transformation. In this situation, changing a policy from 15 years ago is truly necessary. However, it was essential to first determine specifically which areas of this policy need to be changed and to what extent. Will merely changing the network value chain and licensing policy solve everything? It was necessary to first analyse which areas of the telecommunications sector faced the most disorder under the former authoritarian government.

The most irregularities and mismanagement occurred surrounding the state-owned telecommunications companies. I have already mentioned that there is serious debate ongoing under this government too about a project under BTCL, which is under investigation for corruption. The main reason why these state-owned companies have been in a weakened state for years and accused of irregularities and corruption lies in their current management and Articles of Association. According to the current Articles of Association, the Secretary of the Posts and Telecommunications Division is ex-officio chairman of every company.

In my nearly twenty years of journalism in the telecommunications sector, I have seen that under every government, nearly every project of BTCL has sparked conflict between ministers and secretaries. The main reason for the conflict has been appointment of contractors. The allegations of corruption have also centred on contractor appointments. There are allegations that excessive amounts of equipment were purchased for certain projects and that very little of it was actually used for the main project. Those responsible for the Posts and Telecommunications Division should have once inspected BTCL’s warehouse in Chattogram to see how much unused equipment is stockpiled there and then decided whether any project of the former authoritarian government should continue.

For this reason, reform in the telecommunications sector should have begun by changing the Articles of Association of the state-owned telecom companies. This change should have aimed to establish a professional management system free from bureaucratic complications for these state-owned companies. Because these state-owned companies are not only the backbone of the country’s telecommunications system but also of all IT-based services. BTCL still has the potential to build the strongest telecommunications network in the country. If Teletalk had been made profitable on a strong foundation, there would not have been room for such controversy around changing the network value chain and licensing policy in favour of foreign companies.

Bangladesh Submarine Cable Company still meets a major portion of the country's internet bandwidth demand. If this company had stood on a strong foundation, not only internet bandwidth but the entire modern content delivery network would also have remained under its control. If Bangladesh Cable Shilpa Ltd. had been capable of meeting the demand for quality fibre optic cable, there would be no need to import vast quantities of fibre optic cable from abroad. If Telephone Shilpa Sangstha had been developed to manufacture devices as per the needs of technological transformation, Bangladesh could have achieved capability not only in producing mobile handsets or laptops but also in manufacturing network equipment. Besides this, there is a Tier-IV data centre under the ICT Division. If this data centre had been made truly effective, Bangladesh could have become a hub for the data network of international social media platforms.

Because the path of fundamental reform was not taken and instead only the initiative to change the network value chain and licensing policy was taken from the beginning, so much controversy has arisen around it. And this controversy will not end. The current government can change this policy if it wishes, and BTRC can issue one or two guidelines accordingly. These guidelines may even offer special benefits to certain stakeholders in the telecommunications sector. But it cannot be ruled out that after the next government comes to power, this policy may again undergo major changes. Therefore, the change of the network value chain and licensing policy during the interim government will not remove the concerns of any domestic or foreign investor, nor will implementation of the policy be easy.

Rased Mehedi: Telecommunications sector analyst and former president of Telecom and Technology Reporters’ Network (TRNB)