AmbergrisCaye.com Home Forums About Belize Nation No more SMART phone service

Smart int'l services restored, but not Ladyville connection

When we checked with Smart this afternoon, Ian Courtenay, Public Relations Representative, told News Five that the company's international service was back on stream and that it is further requesting Telemedia to reconnect other fiber circuits that it disconnected last week.

Ian Courtenay, P.R. Officer, Smart
"Unfortunately, they still have not reconnected our towers in Ladyville and the Benny's compound so that our Ladyville customers are still undergoing partial service and Vista Del Mar, airport, Ladyville and down to the bridge are getting very little if any service at all. Their proposal gives several steps under which we can come to a final agreement. However, I can say that the agreement is that all our international traffic can go through their switch and of course we will pay an additional fee for that which we are prepared to do."

Duane Moody
"Was smart getting the service to use the Telemedia towers at extremely low costs?"

Ian Courtenay
"Well, I heard the Telemedia board chairman make that statement this morning. The point that Smart would like to make is that if that is their contention then there is a process of renegotiating. These rates were fixed from back in 2004, 2005."

As to the contracts which the Public Utilities Commission has declared invalid because it claims it had not been party to them, SMART maintained that these had been renegotiated several times in the past five years and furthermore that proof of the PUC's involvement was evidenced in its signature on an interconnection rate agreement back in 2005. Smart also says it has requested a meeting with Telemedia and the Chamber of Commerce but it has not gotten a response.

Channel 5

British Caribbean Bank Seeking to Shut Down Belize Telemedia

Latin America based telecoms operator, Belize Telemedia says that it has learned that the British Caribbean Bank is seeking to wind up the company, accusing it of neglecting to pay US$25.172 million dollars. Belize Telemedia has responded saying that it considers the loan, taken out by the previous board of directors of Telemedia, to be unlawful and therefore void.

In August 2009 the company was nationalized by the Government of Belize, who bought over up to 94% of its shares from British Caribbean Bank (formerly Belize Bank), which is controlled by a company chaired by the UK's Lord Ashcroft.

Belize Telemedia's Chairman, Nestor Vasquez held a press conference to explain the situation.

In July 2007, Belize Telemedia took out a loan from Belize Bank for US$22.5 million at an unsustainable interest rate of 12% with repayments over just four years. The company claims that the former directors of the company should not have agreed to such a loan as the firm wasn't generating profits at the level necessary to support the terms. The bank is now seeking an additional US$2.25 million in fees.

Belize Telemedia's new directors say that they have since discovered that the loan was used by the company to buy its own shares - which they say would have been illegal. The shares were then distributed, and companies controlled by Lord Ashcroft received 94% of the allocation.

As the shares were brought back by the company, they shouldn't have received any dividend payments. However, in 2008, although the company made a profit of $37 million, it paid out $70 million in dividends. Belize Telemedia says that this $70 million was given to Belize Bank who then gave shareholders loan notes instead of cash.

Vasquez concluded by saying that in their opinion, the previous owners had been "bleeding the company for years". He also attacked the unreasonably low prices charged to its rival company, SpeedNet for access to infrastructure. Lord Ashcroft also has interests in the parent company of SpeedNet.

If Smart folds, will people with Smart phones be able to use those phones with other companies or will we have to start all over?

Smart moves against Telemedia.; injunction blocks interruptions

On Monday Smart, a subsidiary of Speednet filed an application for an injunction against the telecoms giant, Telemedia, and today it scored a victory in the courts that will restrain Telemedia, from causing it further disruption� at least in the next few days. Attorneys for Speednet, Andrew Marshalleck and Eamon Courtenay, went to court to block any moves against Smart's services that would compromise its ninety thousand strong customer base. Speednet has maintained that Telemedia is in breach of the Belize Telecommunications Act's Section forty-two, which states that a dominant provider shall not take advantage of its power in a market for the supply of a telecommunications service with a view to eliminate or substantially damage another licensee in the market. The grounds for the application included Telemedia's refusal to provide international E1 services to Speednet; its wrongful tampering or removal of Speednet's equipment from the towers that they collocate; and denial of Speednet's access to equipment on the shared towers. The Government was represented by the mother and daughter team, Lois Young and Deanne Barrow. News Five spoke to Smart's Chief Marketing Officer, Anthony Mahler, about this morning's decision.

Anthony Mahler, Chief Marketing Officer, Smart
"This morning our attorneys filed an application for an interim injunction to restrain B.T.L. from taking any further action against Speednet. The Chief Justice heard the application and made a ruling. He ruled for an interim injunction and then he is going to hear both positions on Thursday at nine o'clock. He made his ruling, from what I heard, in the interest of the public. He is saying that he has concerns that B.T.L. may interfere with our services, which would affect over ninety thousand customers."

Jose Sanchez
"I know you were taken off the Benny's tower and the one in Ladyville. Does this injunction in anyway affect the situation with those two towers?"

Anthony Mahler
"He ruled that the status quo remains. So whatever is the position now remains as is."

Jose Sanchez
"So you're still off those two towers?"

Anthony Mahler
"Yes, but he also says we have access to our equipment and all the sites."

Jose Sanchez
"Do you think Telemedia's move is to create another monopoly in the market?"

Anthony Mahler
"Well, their actions speak-I'm not sure what is on their minds because their actions have been anti-competitive; hostile and can only lead me to think that. I'm not sure if that's their position but they have often shown that."

Jose Sanchez
"Telemedia is run by the government, does this mean then this is a government move, from your viewpoint?"

Anthony Mahler
"I'm sure directives come from the government but I have to go back to the point; the Chief Justice said that his ruling is based on the interest of the people. So he has the concern of ninety thousand customers that Smart has.

As Mahler says, both parties, Smart and Telemedia, will return to the Supreme Court on Thursday. News Five will bring you the details of everything that unfolds in the Chief Justice's Chamber.

http://www.channel5belize.com/archive_detail_story.php?story_id=26051

What a lot of nonsense. What is needed is a Regulator, with the power to impose transfer prices for services provided between operators. And telecomms companies that are prepared to operate within the rule of law. With fewer disingenuous lawyers cluttering up the place.

We do and its called PUC.

Doesn't work very well, does it? In any case, does its remit include setting transfer prices?

Chief Justice rules in favour of Smart

The courts were chockfull of cases today. We start with the case of Speednet against Telemedia. Attorneys Andrew Marshalleck and Eamon Courtenay, on behalf of Smart, filed for and received an interim injunction on Monday that restrained Telemedia from taking any further actions that would damage its services to its customers. That injunction held in place until today when Speednet's attorneys squared off with Telemedia's Lawyer Lois Young. Young argued her case in the afternoon. But by six o clock, Chief Justice Abdulai Conteh upheld the injunction and ruled that Telemedia should allow Speednet and Smart Access to the E1 equipment and all other equipment on Telemedia's compound and towers. In essence he ruled that everything should be reverted to the way it was prior to August twenty-fourth when Telemedia was nationalized. News Five caught up with the attorneys as the left the courtroom tonight.

Eamon Courtenay, Attorney for Speednet
"It is a matter of ninety thousand subscribers whose service was interrupted by Telemedia. I think the decision of the learned Chief Justice was very well reasoned, it was carefully crafted and it is an important decision. First of all, it clarifies the role of the court and the P.U.C. when there are disputes between the service providers and the court established, as we submitted, that there is a role for the court even though the P.U.C. may be seized of a dispute because the court has to grant injunctions where somebody is being prejudiced in the interim. I think also, the court underscored the fact that there are five agreements between the parties and that those agreements must be respected. If there's a dispute between the parties on those agreements, there is a process for resolving the dispute on those agreements and in the interim, the parties should abide by the agreement. And if they don't, the court will issue an order to enforce and force them to abide by their agreement. And I think finally, what the court really upheld here is that a dominant service provider, in this case Telemedia, whose infrastructure is required to enable SpeedNet to provide services to its ninety thousand customers, must be made available on fair terms in a non-discriminatory manner and in such a way that does not interfere with the service of the industry. In the meantime, any disputes that are existing between the parties can be resolved, but paramount is the service and the continued service to the people."

Lois Young, Attorney for Telemedia
"Yeah I lost, but I lost-yeah I lost."

Jules Vasquez, Channel 7
"But you can't be pleased with that outcome."

Lois Young
"No, because I think it's wrong and I don't see how his order can be enforced."

Karen Bevans, Chief Operating Officer
"We, ourselves, have concerns about the results. We are in the process of preparing, in conjunction with what the P.U.C. mentioned and with their timeline, and now this ruling today. So I think we need urgent advice from the attorney as to how we proceed now. We must comply with the ruling of the court, but as to how we proceed, then I need the advice of the attorney."

Eamon Courtenay
"I'm sure that the technical people at Telemedia and SpeedNet are going to sit down and return things to the status quo as it existed before."

Jose Sanchez
"So the towers that Smart was taken off, will they be returned to those towers?"

Eamon Courtenay
"That's a matter for Telemedia. The court's order was very clear. Everything that we asked for was granted by the Chief Justice and I'm sure they're going to abide by the ruling of the Chief Justice."

Lois Young
"He was choosing his words carefully but my argument to him was that this is a P.U.C. matter. He doesn't have the expertise to determine who is a dominant provider. Inviting the P.U.C. to intervene on this is not going to cut it. Why should the P.U.C. intervene on this? The court has taken onto itself a jurisdiction that, in my view, has. I think my advice will be to the Chairman of the Board and to Mrs. Bevans to appeal."

While the court injunction allows Smart services to return to normal. The telecom battle will not be settled until the P.U.C. makes a decision on the Telemedia/Smart dispute which is expected to take place on December twenty third.

Channel 5

Chief Justice gives Telemedia 48 hour deadline to hook up Smart

There was another remarkable decision in the court today and it has to do with the government controlled Telemedia and Speednet. Last Thursday executives of the country's two telecommunications providers faced each other in the courtroom of Chief Justice Abdulai Conteh. The CJ ruled then that the injunction that Speednet sought against Telemedia, the dominant telecom provider, would be upheld. The C.J. directed that Telemedia would no longer engage in activities to interrupt Speednet's services. Telemedia was also obligated to restore all the services that had been disrupted prior to coming to court and to reinstall all equipment that had been removed from Speednet's antennas located on Telemedia compounds. But Telemedia didn't comply and Speednet's attorneys had to return to court this morning. Speednet's attorney, Andrew Marshalleck, says that this time Telemedia has forty-eight hours to comply with the Chief Justice's order.

Andrew Marshalleck, Attorney for Speednet
"The trouble that we had since last week Thursday when the orders were made, the things that the court ordered B.T.L. to do, they had not yet done. So we went back to court to have the court fix a firm deadline within which everything that is required to be done is done. And the court made that order this morning and ordered that all the services and facilities that were provided prior to the disruptions be restored and that they be restored within forty-eight hours of today's ruling. So a firm deadline has been set and B.T.L.'s explanation has been they have certain difficulties with the wording of the order and that the court also sought to clarify and made clear that it's the very services that Speednet enjoyed prior to the disruptions that had to be restored. What was being proposed by B.T.L. was to offer some alternative services."

Jose Sanchez
"What alternative services?"

Andrew Marshalleck
"I'm not familiar with the technical aspects of it, but they were offering instead of the unfiltered E1 service, some international direct line which is apparently a different thing. The court made clear this morning, however, that they are to go back to the same service that Speednet enjoyed that service was E1 international services."

Jose Sanchez
"What about the Smart equipment at St. Thomas?"

Andrew Marshalleck
"The equipment that was removed by B.T.L. are also to be reinstalled and that must be within the same forty-eight hours."

Jose Sanchez
"So by weekend everything will be back to normal."

Andrew Marshalleck
"Hopefully. What that does then is set the stage for contempt or other court proceedings to follow in the event that there is noncompliance, not withstanding this very clear deadline. I think that thinking as commercial people do, the holiday season, the upcoming week is a very busy season for telecommunications. I think the dragging of feet has to do with those commercial considerations."

Marshalleck says that Telemedia offered to reconnect Speednet to towers in Ladyville and Benny's for a fee. Well, we'll see what the next move is since the Public Utilities Commission has been on the airwaves declaring illegal the contract between Speednet and Telemedia, even while it claimed it had not seen it.

http://www.channel5belize.com/archive_detail_story.php?story_id=26150

And rightfully so IMHO!

BTL Asks Appeals Court to Lift Injunction

And as the Supreme Court had its customary ceremonial activity this morning - while most of the bench and bar dabbled in ceremony, there was another ongoing judicial hearing that was not customary at all - in fact, we'd venture to say it was a first. Normally, the Court Of Appeals is convened only three times a year - in March, June and October. But the Court of Appeals held a special session this morning to hear BTL's appeal against the injunction against Telemedia on SMART's behalf which was granted by the Chief Justice on December 10th, 2009.

Telemedia wants the injunction lifted as soon as possible - and before the matter goes to trial in the Supreme Court on February 10th. Two judges of the Court of Appeal, President Mottley and Justice Morrison were flown in - at government's expense - to join resident Judge Manuel Sosa to hear the matter. But before they did, the attorney for SMART, Eamon Courtenay entered a preliminary objection, arguing that there is no evidence indicating what's the urgency to hear the case two weeks before it goes to full trial.

Appearing for BTL was Attorney Rodwell Williams and he argued that even though the trial is set for the Supreme Court in February there's no telling when judgment will be delivered. The panel of judges deliberated on this for 20 minutes and over-ruled Courtenay's Objection. With that, arguments proceeded and continued right up to news time this evening. Our special correspondent Janelle Chanona is still at court, and if it finishes before news time, we'll have an update.

It's worth noting that company secretary for BTL Lois Young is not appearing because she is in London arguing the referendum amendment to the constitution at the Privy Council on government's behalf. Lisa Shoman is arguing against on behalf of the applicants.

http://www.7newsbelize.com/sstory.php?nid=16000