Europe needs a coherent and coordinated radio spectrum policy

The mobile broadband has become the most dynamic ICT market and much more important than the underlying technology. It has a transformational impact, driving far-reaching social and economic transformations through new services and changes in consumer habits. It is changing the way we live and work. Europe was once a leader in mobile communications, but has in recent years fallen behind South Korea, Japan, Australia and United States, where markets now enjoy much higher penetration rates of 4G mobile broadband communications than in Europe.

Reasons for the low take-up of mobile broadband in Slovenia

The latest global broadband report, released on Saturday by the United Nations Broadband Commission, reveals an astonishingly high global growth rate in mobile broadband subscriptions of some 30%. This is the highest growth rate of any ICT. In 2012, it exceeded fixed broadband subscriptions by a ratio of 3:1 (up from 2:1 just two years ago).

Slovenia has dropped seven ranks in mobile broadband penetration to 43rd place in the 2013 global broadband report. The decline is in large part attributable to a slower adoption of mobile broadband technology despite the growth of subscriptions in 2012 was still remarkably high at 26,6%. Slovenia has lost two places and is 22nd amongst 28 EU member states. What is worrying is the gap between the economies with highest mobile broadband penetration that is three times higher than in Slovenia.

Telekom Slovenije – a brief history of its privatisation

Telekom Slovenije, one of Slovenia’s largest and most important business groups, has successfully resisted privatisation since its separation from PTT Slovenije in 1995. Both privatisation attempts were marked with strong opposition against privatisation. For proponents of state ownership Telekom Slovenije has been a strategic company and valuable state’s crown jewel that should remain state-owned. This is the third time the government has considered selling its stake in the incumbent telecommunications operator. The government seems to be determined to carry out the privatisation of Telekom Slovenije. However, its privatisation plan is likely to face strong opposition which is already growing.

The first privatisation attempt – a missed peak of the telecom hype

The first attempt to privatise Telekom Slovenije was made between 1999 and 2001. The government started the privatisation process in 1999 and appointed members of the privatisation commission. In 2000, it hired the consultancy firm PriceWaterhouseCoopers (PWC) that prepared three privatisation models. Each envisaged a reduction of the state’s stake in Telekom Slovenije below 50% either immediately or in a short run of two to three years. 

Minister Pikalo would sell Telekom Slovenije without infrastructure

The Slovenian minister for electronic communications Jernej Pikalo has recently announced that he is going to propose structural separation of Telekom Slovenije. The announcement has come as a surprise as there had been no prior consultation on the issue, neither within the government offices nor publicly with other stakeholders. Besides, Telekom Slovenije has been on a list of state-owned companies for sale and the Parliament has already approved the government’s privatisation plan. The next step in privatisation was made at the end of August when shareholders, the majority of them state-owned companies, signed an agreement to sell a combined stake of 72,75% in Telekom Slovenije, which is valued at EUR 710 million at current market price. The state’s stake is worth EUR 517 million.

Slovenia lacks telecoms network investment

The Slovenian electronic communications sector has lost much of its steam between 2008 and 2011. The sector's investment, driven by infrastructure competition and fibre deployment, peaked in 2008 at EUR 401 million, accounting to 32,6% of the sector's revenue (Figure 1). The investment then fell to EUR 120 million in 2011, representing only 9,8% of the sector's revenue, which placed Slovenia in the last position among the EU Member States (Figure 2). Investment in the electronic communications sector recovered to EUR 173 million in 2012, reaching a level of 14,3% of the sector's revenue.

Škodljivo zavlačevanje pri mobilnih širokopasovnih storitvah

Evropska komisija je ta teden sporočila svojo odločitev, s katero je zavrnila prošnjo Slovenije za odlog uporabe frekvenčnega pasu 800 MHz za brezžične širokopasovne povezave. Skladno z evropskim večletnim programom politike radijskega spektra, sprejetim 14. marca 2012, bi Slovenija postopek odobritve za uporabo tega frekvenčnega pasu morala izpeljati do 1. januarja 2013. Po sedanjih načrtih agencije se komercialna uporaba verjetno ne bo pričela pred letom 2015. Ob zapletih v postopku odobritve, s katerim se omogoči uporaba pasu za elektronske komunikacijske storitve, ki niso radiodifuzija, pa se lahko komercialna uporaba pomakne še bolj v prihodnost.

Ključne tožbe proti Telekomu v rokah ene sodnice

V današnji izdaji Dnevnika novinar Tomaž Modic piše o spremembi, ki se je zgodila v vodenju sodnih postopkov v odškodninskih tožbah proti Telekomu Slovenije, zaradi kršenja protimonopolne zakonodaje. Vodenje postopkov v štirih največjih tožbah, v katerih konkurenčni operaterji od Telekoma Slovenije zahtevajo plačilo skupno več kot 400 milijonov evrov odškodnine, je prevzela ljubljanska okrožna sodnica Lidija Smolar.

Po objavi prispevka sredi aprila, je Okrožno sodišče v Ljubljani v začetku maja s spremembo razporeda sodnikov za leto 2013 oblikovalo specializirano skupino sodnikov, ki se bodo ukvarjali izključno s spori na področju varstva konkurence. Odločitev o oblikovanju specializirane skupine je morda korak v pravo smer, saj se bodo sodniki lahko specializirali in ciljno usposabljali. To bi lahko omogočilo tudi hitrejše in kakovostnejše sojenje. 

Slovenian telecoms regulator decided to reduce market transparency

Informed consumers are essential to the fair and efficient functioning of electronic communications markets. In well-functioning markets, consumers are able to compare service plans and pricing and switch between services. For consumers to make informed decisions, they need to understand the price and quality of their options. Therefore, they need to be provided with factual information on which to base their choices.

In Slovenia, consumers do not have access to independent advice and guidance to help them make informed decisions about communications products and services and to choose between service providers. They even do not have access to accurate, comprehensive and up to date pricing and service plan information provided in one place.

Elektronske komunikacijske storitve in oprema za invalide

Na osnovi 5. točke drugega odstavka 115. člena in 135. člena Zakona o elektronskih komunikacijah (Ur.l. RS, št. 109/2012; ZEKom-1), sledeč dopolnitvi člena 7 in členu 23a Direktive 2009/136/ES ter ugotovitvam združenja evropskih regulatorjev BEREC, je treba dopolniti Uredbo o ukrepih za končne uporabnike invalide (Ur.l. RS, št. 92/2010).

Dosedanja Uredba o ukrepih za končne uporabnike invalide predpisuje le ukrepe za izvajalca univerzalne storitve. Na osnovi 135. člena ZEKom-1, sledeč členu 23a Direktive 2009/136/ES, pa bi določene tehnične in funkcionalne zahteve glede ukrepov za končne uporabnike invalide lahko naložili tudi ostalim izvajalcem elektronskih komunikacijskih storitev. S tem bi končnim uporabnikom invalidom zagotovili enakovreden dostop do elektronskih komunikacijskih storitev, ki je enakovreden dostopu večine končnih uporabnikov, in možnost, da izbirajo med izvajalci in storitvami, ki so na voljo večini končnih uporabnikov.

Skladno s tem se Vladi Republike Slovenije pri pripravi Uredbe o ukrepih za končne uporabnike invalide ni treba omejiti zgolj na izvajalca univerzalne storitve, ampak bi določene ukrepe (vezane na določene storitve ali ponudnike storitev) lahko predpisala tudi za druge izvajalce elektronskih komunikacijskih storitev.

Competition protection in the interest of the private sector or of the state?

Telekom – The Impregnable State Fortress

Last month, the Ljubljana District Court issued its ruling, completely dismissing T-2’s damages claims against Telekom Slovenije in the amount of 130 million euros. T-2 filed its lawsuit already six years ago against Telekom Slovenije over alleged anti-competitive actions, which, it claimed, prevented it from successfully entering the internet services market. The main hearing did not get underway until January of this year, but it finished in just an hour and a half, so the ruling was no surprise. At the hearing, the judge did not even ask the question of whether or not the claims of Telekom’s abuse of dominant market position were founded, but first verified that T-2 had submitted enough evidence to calculate the damages. Since the judge was of the opinion that a solid cubic meter of documents was insufficient, she completed the proceedings without even giving T-2 an opportunity to submit additional evidence for its claims. With such a conclusion to the case in which the parties submitted to the court a total of three thousand pages of written materials over the course of six years and over five thousand pieces of evidence, one has to ask the question, what poses the greatest obstacle to competition: Telekom, the Civil Procedures Act, or Slovenian courts themselves? Or is this a concerted action?

Is Telekom not guilty?

Telekom’s management continues to insist that it has always adhered to Slovenian legislation, and that it has not violated any competition rules. Yet the facts suggest otherwise. Telekom’s competitors have been fighting against its anti-competitive activities and abuse of dominant market position since 1996. In these fifteen years, at least a dozen proceedings have been initiated before the Slovenian Competition Protection Agency (previously the Competition Protection Office). The Agency has never been particularly keen on investigating Telekom’s alleged abuses, as the proceedings for establishing the existence of infringements have always been dragged out longer than stipulated by law, but it has nonetheless issued a few decisions.