|
Eastern
Telecommunications Philippines Inc. (ETPI) asked the
National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) to deny the
appeal of Digital Telecommunications Philippines Inc. (Digitel)
in a case that found it violating the rules against
unilateral blocking of interconnection access with
another carrier.
In its
seven-page motion, ETPI said Digitel’s intent to block
the access numbers being used for dial-up Internet
service can be supported by the lack of commitment on
the part of Digitel to solve the congestion problem.
“Despite the blocking incident, which happened September
2005, ETPI did not stop to discuss with Digitel the
resolution of the congestion problem. In fact, ETPI and
Digitel agreed to activate additional lines to solve the
congestion. However, Digitel did not activate additional
circuits,” said ETPI.
Moreover, the persuasion made by Digitel to its
subscribers to use GAS Internet prepaid cards instead of
ETPI’s GO! Prepaid Internet cards support the intent of
Digitel to block the access numbers, added ETPI.
Digitel,
however, maintained it had sufficient and legal
justification for blocking the access numbers of ETPI
that were being used for dial-up Internet service.
Digitel
was ordered by the NTC to pay a fine of P268,400. It
believes that the NTC, in effect, recognized the fact
that the blocking was not intentional since it posed an
issue as to whether the blocking of the access number
was justified.
“After
evaluation of the facts and discussion of the parties,
the issue, therefore, is whether there is justification
on the part of Digitel to block the access number being
used by ETPI…Digitel’s intentional and unilateral
blocking of the access numbers being used by ETPI is a
clear violation section 9 of the NTC MC 14-7-2000,” said
the NTC in its June 11 decision.
But
assuming that there was sufficient and legal
justification for blocking the access numbers, ETPI said
Digitel still violated the NTC policy against unilateral
blocking.
“By
taking the law into its own hands, disrupted the access
of its subscribers to the dial-up Internet services of
ETPI, Digitel’s action clearly violates the provision of
NTC memorandum circular no. 14-7-2000,” said ETPI.
ETPI
also said that there was no commitment on the part of
Digitel to solve the congestion problem. “If indeed
there were commitments on the part of Digitel to solve
the alleged congestion problem, Digitel could have at
least written ETPI a proposal on how to activate
additional circuits. However, Digitel delayed the
activation of circuits. In short, there is no evidence
on the part of Digitel to prove that it was committed to
solve the alleged congestion,” said ETPI.
Digitel
said it was forced to block the access of ETPI’s premium
prepaid Internet card, marketed under the brand name GO!
Premium Internet card, because the interconnection links
had been congested.
“It was
the congestion in the interconnect trunks which
obviously divested the subscribers of both parties the
access to their desired services: dial up Internet
service or voice calls. Digitel did what was needed to
be done at that point in time when its interconnection
trunks were congested. Its act of blocking the access
number was due to the unreasonable congestion of the
interconnection trunks,” said Digitel.
But the
phone firm of conglomerate JG Summit Holdings, Inc. said
the NTC should also hold ETPI liable for violating the
commission’s interconnection policies.
“Digitel, as a party to the interconnection, is of the
same footing as the complainants, and likewise protected
by the law against violators of interconnection
agreements. Thus, if (ETPI’s) unauthorized and abusive
use of the interconnection trunks for their prepaid
Internet service would be left unscathed, the same
policies espoused by them for their protection under the
industry’s existing laws should be likely upheld for and
applied to Digitel’s protection,” said Digitel. |
