PTCL-Telenor Merger Row: Anusha Rahman Quits IT Panel?
As the tensions deepen over the PTCL-Telenor Merger, Anusha Rahman has reportedly resigned from the IT Senate Standing Committee.
She has been serving on the board of PTCL subsidiary Ufone. During the meeting of the IT senate body, members of the committee had asked the secretary IT ministry to provide the names of the board directors of Ufone.
Senator Kamran Murtaza had also pointed out that directors had been receiving 5000 dollars for one meeting.
The PTCL was paying a hefty amount to the board directors despite the fact that it was facing huge losses.PTCL Lapses Stall $1bn Ufone–Telenor Merger
But IT ministry officials had shown reluctance to provide names of the board directors of Ufon,e which had sparked controversy.
Sources told NewzTodays that Anusha Rehman had now resigned from the IT committee and moved to the Senate body on Health.
Since PTCL acquired Telenor, there has been controversy over the acquisition. CCP had raised several questions, and one of them was how PTCL would arrange financing to run Telenor at a time when it was going into losses.
The other key question was that Ufone, a subsidiary of PTCL, had been parking its losses in PTCL. PTCL was a listed company on the Stock Exchange, whereas Ufone was not a listed company.
CCP had observed that PTCL was cross-subsidizing Ufone. The losses of Ufone, which were being parked into PTCL, had reportedly deprived the government of the profits.
The Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP), in a presentation submitted to the Senate body on IT, revealed that PTCL failed again to submit a concrete one billion dollars investment plan which was one of the conditions to allow the PTCL-Telenor merger.
The anti-cartelization watchdog further said that PTCL challenged most of PTA’s regulations in the Courts. It had also obtained Stay Orders, such as the SMP determination is challenged.
Therefore, the regulator said that RIO approval from PTCL was not applicable. It means that PTA has no check on the tariffs/rates charged by PTCL to different telecom operators,” CCP said, adding that non-compliance with the Separate Accounting Requirement applicable to Ufone and PTCL means there is potential risk of cross-subsidization.
It said that the government had issued an LDI license to PTCL and issued a CMO license to Ufone. But both have joint management, which creates competition concerns in relation to cross-subsidization.
PTCL has been a dominant player in the upstream and downstream business segments of the telecom market, and therefore, according to CCP, PTCL abuses its dominant position.
CCP further said that PTCL also had a history of collusive practices. Quoting an example, CCP said that PTCL, along with 13 undertakings, was penalized for anti-competitive practices in the ICH case, where each LDI operator was penalized.