Ooredoo has “expressed its disappointment” with the “CRA Decision and Orders”, issued on September 8, in relation to access to its duct infrastructure.
In the view of Ooredoo, “the CRA has not given sufficient consideration to Ooredoo’s input or the evidence it has
presented.”
Ooredoo said it “has been fully co-operating” with the CRA and has been sharing its mobile sites with Vodafone Qatar since 2009. It opened its ducts network to QNBN in 2012 and today the majority of the QNBN network in Qatar passes through the Ooredoo network.
“We are a responsible organisation that abides by the rules. However, for the good of the people, the industry and Qatar’s vision for growth, it is essential for all parties to do the same,” Ooredoo said.
Ooredoo has been in discussions with the CRA at various levels throughout the year and said it believes things are progressing well to reach a final agreement on this matter.
“However, the CRA has opted to make this commercial dispute into a public discussion, so Ooredoo is compelled to make the facts public,” a company statement yesterday said.
The fact of the matter is that Ooredoo has not refused access to its network infrastructure. In Ooredoo’s opinion, the CRA Decision and Order includes grave errors:
• The CRA inserted modifications in the final Reference Infrastructure Access Offer (RIAO) without consulting Ooredoo. Such modifications may expose our network to mismanagement and would negatively impact the quality of services that we offer to our customers, in particular government and public-critical services. We have a duty to protect our customers and ensure service continuity. Our experience with QNBN shows that we need to be very careful in allowing third parties to utilise our networks.
• The Order requiring the adoption of the RIAO in its current form is not balanced and favours our competitors,
including:
• Excluding technical standards that Ooredoo has adopted for many years;
• Requiring Ooredoo to bear the full cost of the auditors alone;
• Forcing Ooredoo to offer access to ducts that are not owned by Ooredoo;
• Making modifications to economic sections, which mean providing services that are significantly below cost.
In its ruling, the CRA has not sufficiently considered QNBN’s illicit use of Ooredoo’s infrastructure – the deliberate breach of the Infrastructure Access Agreement (IAA) referred to as “The Sheraton Matter”.
“The Sheraton Matter demonstrates that QNBN is prepared to breach the IAA – the issue that led to its partial suspension, which the CRA has ignored in its ruling,” Ooredoo said.
Ooredoo said its “conduct has been in accordance” with the IAA and agreements on operational matters agreed by parties outside of the IAA. Unfortunately, QNBN seems unwilling to take the steps necessary to abide by the IAA. It has not adhered to mutually-agreed safeguards, so that it could rush commercial services into the market.
QNBN’s conduct has not been limited to a one-off breach of the IAA, but multiple instances that QNBN had repeatedly failed to rectify. These breaches have not been investigated by the CRA and are not mentioned in the Decision and Orders.
Ooredoo has “consistently stated that it is happy” to resume the IAA with QNBN, once QNBN rectifies its breaches. Ooredoo is also happy to publish the RIAO and enter into agreements with other service providers on the basis of the RIAO, once the RIAO accords with the law. This includes Ooredoo’s right to be fairly compensated for providing access to its infrastructure.
Ooredoo believes an underlying problem is also the lack of rigour applied by the CRA in its decision-making. Ooredoo has engaged in the development of the RIAO in good faith, and was close to finalising the whole process. It was the CRA that then amended the RIAO, in a manner that appears contrary to the nation’s Law and Licenses.
Ooredoo reiterates its belief that there is a conflict of interest in the CRA adjudicating commercial agreements relating to QNBN, which is affiliated to and ultimately operated by the CRA.
The CRA assertion that there is very limited competition in the fixed market cannot be attributed to Ooredoo. Vodafone Qatar was granted a fixed license in April 2010 with strict rollout obligations, and QNBN entered into the IAA in April 2012.
“The CRA has failed to enforce compliance by either of these parties, which has denied Qatar the diversified and second network that it deserves, and that other countries enjoy.”
ooredoo
