Indian Regulators are expected to
function at "arm's length" - implying no Government intervention in
their day-to-day operations and decision making. The role of a Government
should ideally be that of a policy maker while that of a Regulator as an
implementer of that policy. However, recently, a new issue crept up, wherein
the inter ministerial body for telecom policy, Digital Communications
Commission (DCC), created a controversy when it suggested that the Telecom
Regulatory Authority of India (Trai) seek "clarifications" from the
Department of Telecom (DoT) before releasing its recommendations on various
issues. It has argued that a “more proactive exchange of inputs” can promote
“better alignment of perspectives” and result in “swift financial”
recommendations and reduce “back references”.
The law provides for TRAI to aid and advise govt on telecom and broadcast
matters, while having control over certain issues related to mobile tariffs and
telecom interconnect agreements. The controversy was created as the
latest discord was related to satellite communications spectrum, its pricing
and the revenue share arrangement. Even as DoT downplayed the incident
saying it was just a suggestion and not binding, and the intention was only to
hasten decision making, some Trai officials thus viewed it as Government
intrusion into their area of working.
This sort of issue keeps happening from time-to-time when there is no
clear demarcation of the roles of Regulator and the Government. Such
issues only create apprehensions that Regulators are not given the independence
of decision making that they should have or are given as per Law - and the
ultimate decision-making is often at the hands of the Government.
Government suggests to Trai: Consult us before recommendations - The
Times of India
