HE Global System
for Mobile (GSM) communications was introduced into the country a little over
three years ago. Its introduction, expedient and exigent, has no doubt changed
the nation’s socio-economic landscape.
In one breath, it provided an instant and fitting answer to
the nation’s abysmally low teledensity.
Prior to the landmark GSM licence auction in 2001 and the
subsequent rollout same year, the nation’s teledensity was as low as 400,000
telephone lines for a population of over 120 million. This, according to the
International Telecommunications Union (ITU), ranked among the worst in the
world.
Thus it was cheery news when the Nigerian Communications
Commission (NCC), the nation’s telecommunications regulatory body, successfully
organised what was rated even by the ITU as one of the best GSM licence auctions
in the world, devoid of sleight of hand, executive and bureaucratic
meddlesomeness.
Today, by benefit of hindsight, we make bold to say that the
auction was an exercise worth its trouble. The multiplier effects of the
introduction of GSM are manifold.
Aside the improved teledensity from 400,000 to over five
million lines, the entry of GSM has created employment and economies of scale,
putting wealth, as it were, in the hands of many Nigerians.
Socially, it has contributed significantly in reducing the
frustrations of Nigerians by restricting commuting on our terribly bad roads.
This has in no small measure helped to reduce the rate of accidents on our
highways and byways.
Unfortunately, however, all the gains, successes and benefits
attributed to the technology these past three years are fast being eroded by a
bouquet of crises ranging from incomplete calls through poor interconnectivity
among the various operators to distortions in the network.
The net effect is that a technology that was supposed to save
Nigerians from the frustration of telephone unavailability, inaccessibility and
unaffordability has brought in its wake a different but more traumatising genre
of frustration.
We find this both curious and strange. For sure, GSM is a
proven, tested and time-critical piece of digital technology which has
functioned and still functions effectively in other climes. Its success can only
be best assessed by the level of deployment of the technology globally.
It is therefore disturbing that the same technology in its
three years life in Nigeria has been fraught with hitches and glitches. Add to
these the legendary high subscription charges described as one of the highest in
the world, then you would appreciate the trouble Nigerians go through as they
deploy the GSM services in their daily pursuits.
Problems like inability to recharge and ramp up their credit
status, poor but over-subscribed infrastructure and high subscription charges
have left the consumers at the mercy of these operators some of which have
consistently declared billions of naira as profit.
While it is convenient to blame the operators for much of
these problems, we are constrained to heap more of the blame at the doorsteps of
the NCC.
The commission should know that its regulatory function does
not begin and end with issuing licences. In fact, one of its cardinal functions
is the protection of consumers. Even under the ITU guidelines, the consumer must
and should be protected from undue exploitation by operators.
We note that the inability of the NCC to rein in operators is
not necessarily for lack of initiative. Its manifest inability to protect
consumers verges more on complicity with the operators rather than on
complacency or lack of vision.
The Consumer Parliament, a complaint and redressal forum
initiated by the commission was meant to be a platform where the consumer would
be heard and his anxiety and problem either assuaged or solved. But this has not
in practical terms been the case.
We have witnessed many instances where the NCC issues a
directive presumably to protect the consumers but in most cases, the operators
spurn the directive. The case of interconnectivity which has lingered for years
with one service provider deliberately frustrating another simply to undercut
competition is one too painful to forget. Because of poor interconnectivity
among operators, the consumer is being forced to patronise more than one
operator.
Just as we salute the courage of the NCC in carrying out a
transparent and successful auction, we also urge the commission to bring its
influence to bear on the operators so that subscribers, existing and potential,
would get value for their money.
To save the customer from further exploitation, the NCC
should ensure that a good part of the billions of naira raked in as profit by
the operators are ploughed back into the system to grow, expand and effectively
sustain the network.
More importantly, the commission should be insulated from the
bureucratic grip of the Ministry of Communication to enable it function
effectively as a truly independent regulatory body.
