Supreme Court orders, takes charge
Regarding comments on Cross Current and another licensee DTH project in its previous DTH bidding in 2003, Pemra defends its denial of licence without disclosing facts. Under Pemra law, it has to allow or deny a licence in 100 days. However it took Pemra almost two years to issue bid acceptance letter which was done due to political pressures under General Pervez Musharraf regime. Due to abnormal delay in approving the bids, Indian DTH operators took over available satellite capacity and equipment cost had sky rocketed which undermined CCPL project feasibility. Pemra then took further licence fee from the bidders but did not issue terms and conditions and contract despite committing in writing to issue a provisional licence. In fact previous governments led by Gen Pervez Musharraf and then Asif Ali Zardari had no intention to give licence to bidders. The successful bidders had proposed a bouquet of channels, tariff and technology plan as asked in Pemra bidding document and without Pemra’s response, the bidders did not know what channels it can distribute and what tariff it can sell the channels for. During the six years which Pemra took to cancel bidders licence, never once it disclosed the final terms and conditions of the contract, which reflects its misuse of regulatory position.
During this time, PTV which never participated in Pemra DTH licence bidding, issued four tenders for a DTH project and Pemra never stopped PTV from frustrating the bidders’ efforts to launch projects. It was during this time that Indian DTH services flooded the Pakistan market.
Pemra press release quotes its consultants report to justify the number of licences and licence base price but does not give any data whereas Jang/ The News report gave accurate data to justify number of DTH licences in Pakistan and the licence base price.
Pemra justifies its conduct of present process under an acting chairman under the approval given by the Authority on Aug 11, 2013. Pemra spokesperson again conveniently ignores the Supreme Court decision in this regard which struck off the Content Regulation 2013 duly approved by a Pemra Authority under an acting chairman on the grounds that the Authority is not properly constituted and there is no provision of acting chairman Pemra and that acting chairman can only take day-to-day decision and not long term policy decisions.
Pemra spokesperson also has no comment to offer on the fact that Pemra has been governed by police officers including present acting chairman for half of its life and rest by bureaucrats. This is in contravention of the Pemra Ordinance which stipulates that the chairman Pemra should have “substantial experience in media”.
Pemra spokesperson also has no comment to offer on the unprecedented denial to broadcasters licensed by Pemra to participate in DTH bidding. There is no parallel or example in international media industry that broadcasters are excluded from a DTH licence bidding process for 15 years. Pemra spokesperson is also quiet on the discriminatory treatment to broadcasters against constitutional provision for freedom of expression and right to do business by denying them participation in DTH bidding. This implies that for next 15 years, the broadcasters would have no control or say in how their TV channels are priced and sold to Pakistani subscribers, how their channels are marketed and sold, what’s the quality which subscribers will receive and the allied customer care. There must be no parallel of such treatment to manufacturer of a product in any business sector in Pakistan.