THERE is now no impediment to the implementation of fixed-number portability (FNP) as a High Court judge has ruled that local telecom provider TSTT is legally obligated to allow fixed-landline customers to change their service provider without changing their number.
Already Justice Frank Seepersad’s ruling on Wednesday has been hailed by the Telecommunications Authority of TT (TATT), which was called on to defend a judicial review claim brought by Columbus Communications Trinidad Ltd (CCTL) over the FNP issue.
The authority’s CEO,Cynthia Reddock-Downes, in a telephone interview with Newsday, immediately after the ruling, said, “In our view it is important decision, a very significant one for Trinidad and Tobago, because now there is no impediment for the implementation of FNP.
“It is a victory for the public.”
Reddock-Downes said the issue of FNP was significant, but lamented that over the past four years, neither private citizens nor businesses could change service providers and keep their existing telephone numbers, because of TSTT’s insistence that it had no legal requirement to facilitate the process.
In 2016, Columbus Communications complained to TATT of TSTT’s non-compliance, calling on the regulatory body to exercise its statutory power to compel the state-owned telecoms provider to implement FNP.
It was argued that while TSTT has configured its equipment to permit FNP, it has not permitted CCTL or other operators to access its system.
In response, TATT directed TSTT to implement FNP, but TSTT insisted the regulations under the Telecommunications Act only required concessionaires to configure their networks to facilitate FNP, but there was no obligation to implement FNP.
Reddock-Downes said Wednesday’s ruling now meant that TSTT would be forced to commit to the regulations to allow customers to change service providers while keeping their existing numbers.
Although TATT came in for some criticism from the judge for its “tardiness” in taking appropriate action against TSTT, Reddock-Downes said the provider had, over those years, resisted the authority’s directions.
“We did all we could encourage TSTT to implement (FNP), which they refused to do.”
She explained the authority had to treat service providers fairly, and investigate and review all issues that arose, including TSTT’s complaints.
Reddock-Downes said despite TSTT being a majority-owned state entity, as far as the authority was concerned, “It was just another service provider.”
She said there were three avenues open to TATT to get TSTT to comply, but two would have resulted in its concession being either suspended or ending, which would have had national security implications, or instituting criminal proceedings against the company.
“We couldn’t consider those.”
Instead, TATT chose to approach the Attorney General for a fiat (formal authorisation) to approach the courts for an injunction to force TSTT to act.
Although the authority did approach the AG, it is still waiting for the fiat to be granted.
This issue was r
