Up Front
Telecommunications battle linesdrawn in Belize
Less than a month after telecommunicationsgiants, Cable & Wireless (C&W), walked away the victorin a legal tussle here in Cayman over the rights to Internet telephony,a similar matter, which came up for hearing recently in the BelizeanCourts, did not have such a sweet taste in the mouth of the defendant,Belize Telecommunications Limited (BTL).
According to the Sunday, November 12 edition of the Belize Reporter,BTL last week suffered yet another setback in the country's SupremeCourt when the presiding judge, Justice George Meerabux ruledto further extend an injunction against the company. Unfortunately,the report does not say who filed proceedings against the company.
The injunction, the newspaper says, not only bars BTL from placingrestrictions on the use of its Internet service but also fromblocking the importation of electronic devices, notably the IPStar, which can enhance consumer use and enjoyment of the Internet.
Here in Cayman, the dispute was, and still is, over the use ofa device known as the 'Yapjack', which enables Net2Phone, a US-basedInternet Telephony Provider (ITP) and one of the three plaintiffsin the legal proceedings against Cable & Wireless, to offerthe public an alternative and cheaper means of placing overseascalls. According to experts in the field, both the 'Yapjack' andthe IP Star, serve the same purpose.
Like BTL, which is claiming that it has "exclusive licenceto operate both telephone and Internet services in and over Belize,to the exclusion of everything and everybody else", so toodoes Cable & Wireless, though not in the exact same words.
But while Justice Meerabux overturned BTL's argument, JusticeHenry Graham, before whom the matter was heard locally, rejectedthe collective argument put up by the plaintiffs that by blockingaccess to their Internet website and network, Cable & Wirelesswas in effect "unlawfully" interfering with their business.
The plaintiff group argued that they were not providing a telecommunicationsservice and as such was not guilty of breaching Cable & Wireless'license to provide national and international systems and servicesin the Cayman Islands.
Justice Graham, however, begged to differ with this line of reasoningon the grounds that the plaintiffs were engaged in the productionand marketing of a telephone service that intentionally breachedthe Cable & Wireless license, and that the latter had actedappropriately by blocking access.
Justice Meerabux, on the other hand, wrote in summing up: "Inexercising my discretion in granting this injunction, I had toconsider the additional issue of whether the exclusive telecommunicationslicense enjoyed by the defendant (BTL) constitutes not only aninterference with the enshrined constitutional guarantee of freedomof expression, but can be justified in the public interest..."
He was further quoted as saying: "I find that the allegedtransgressions or trespassing of any one of the fundamental rightsenshrined in the Constitution of Belize, which is the Supremeand paramount law, requires urgent action.
"We should not procrastinate and fall asleep on alleged breachesof these sacred rights on the body-politic of Belize."
The matter again came up for hearing on Wednesday November 15last.