Telcom regulator must be fair to all

The new rules published by the minister for Information and Communications did more than blow the lid off pent-up rivalry between mobile phone companies.

They put in the spotlight the Communications Commission of Kenya and its role as regulator in a fiercely competitive industry. There is no doubt that such a vital service requires close supervision to ensure fair play and protect the interests of the consumer.

This might, naturally involve, keeping tabs on the operation of any entity that becomes a dominant player. In any competitive environment, however, this is a delicate function, for the market regulator must not exceed its powers and get entangled in corporate battles.

Where there is clearly one dominant player as prevails in the Kenya market, any efforts to redress the situation must not be implemented in a fashion that suggests the market regulator is trying to cut down a successful operator at the behest of those that have not managed to sell their services and products as effectively.

The dominant player in the Kenya market, Safaricom, is already crying foul and accusing CCK of siding with its rivals. It happens that under the new regulations, it is only Safaricom that can be classified as a dominant player and thus is the only one subject to the tighter controls.

The clearest winners, at least in the short term, are small players, whose business will be protected from Safaricom’s aggressive assaults.

The CCK board should try to bridge the divide in the industry – where three players are set against one – by clearly defining these regulations to show they are designed in the best interests of consumers rather than to the needs of some providers.

If there’s incontrovertible evidence that any company is abusing market dominance or exploiting consumers, then it must be reined in. But it is crucial that the rules apply equally to all competitors in the market; and that CCK be seen as an impartial referee.