Last week, interconnection failed between Digicel and the APUA in Antigua and Barbuda. This post discusses the importance of interconnection and some of the implications to both companies.

For a few days last week, Digicel’s customers in Antigua and Barbuda could not make or receive calls outside of their network, and neither could they access emergency services or call internationally. Based on the allegations reported in the local media, Digicel and the incumbent, the Antigua Public Utilities Authority (APUA), blamed each other for the breakdown of service. Digicel alleged that the APUA was hindering rectification of a technical problem, whilst the APUA focussed on its claim that Digicel owed large outstanding amounts for interconnection services. Nevertheless, before the end of the week, Digicel sought and was granted an injunction forcing the APUA to re-establish interconnection with its network, and restoring full service to its customers.

The contention between the APUA and Digicel is nothing new – the APUA’s allegation of unsettled interconnection payments has been public for several months. However, while the two parties posture, from Monday 25 July and for a period of about 4 days, telecoms customers were adversely affected by the breakdown of interconnection between the major telecoms networks.

What is interconnection? Why is it important?

According to the World Trade Organisation, interconnection can be defined as:

linking with suppliers providing public telecommunications transport networks or services in order to allow the users of one supplier to communicate with users of another supplier and to access services provided by another supplier, where specific commitments are undertaken.

Although this definition seems a bit longwinded, essentially, it speaks to the physical linking of two or more networks thus allowing the subscribers of one network to seamlessly connect with subscribers of another network. Without interconnection, it might not be financially viable for calls on one network to successfully reach users on a different network.

Hence, interconnection is important because it connects the various telecoms networks in a particular area, which in turn creates a larger cohesive network where inherently, all subscribers are connected to each other. It therefore means that, among other things:

  • interconnection is one of the most economical means of connecting networks in a manner that is beneficial to both network operators and customers
  • telecoms networks do not exist and neither do they operate isolated from each other
  • a customer does not have to subscribe to more than one network in order to connect with users on other networks
  • a telecoms operator is not limited to customers on its own network only; essentially, it is serving all customers on all networks to which it is connected
  • since a larger network (and larger customer base) is being established, the overall value of the services being provided increases.

Should interconnection be regulated?

In light of the benefits, especially to newer entrants to the telecoms market, interconnection tends to be a contentious issue, which frequently requires regulatory intervention for its successful establishment. New service providers that might be building their customer bases from scratch are generally eager to connect with the incumbents in the market. However, for existing players, especially those that already have larger customer bases, there is little incentive to interconnect with smaller networks. Consequently, they often attempt to thwart the process or to keep the entrant at a distinct disadvantage, by:

  • refusing to interconnect
  • offering to interconnect at rates considerably higher than what they would charge themselves for the same services, or
  • providing poorer quality interconnection services to the entrant, than what they would provide to themselves.

A well-empowered regulator is particularly valuable in such circumstances, and is usually required to manage interconnection processes. However, this appears not to be the case in Antigua and Barbuda.

Implications for the APUA and Digicel

An independent telecoms regulator does not exist in Antigua and Barbuda. The Telecommunications Division, in the Ministry of Information, Broadcasting and Telecommunications, provides some oversight to the sector. However, it is understood that by the end of this year, as a signatory of the EU Economic Partnership Agreement, the Government is mandated to liberalise the telecoms sector and to establish a separate regulatory body.

With regard to the impasse between the APUA and Digicel, it is longstanding, and could indeed benefit from regulatory assistance. Based on recent newspaper reports, both parties agree that monies are outstanding, but dispute the amounts owed. In light of the fact that a regulator will only be established towards year-end, and it will require time to develop its resources, it is likely that resolution through the courts might be the most feasible option into the foreseeable future. However, this route is often adversarial, expensive and protracted.

Nevertheless, the resolution of interconnection disputes requires urgent attention. In this day and age, it is unacceptable for customers, regardless of network, to be at the mercy of providers who refuse to cooperate with each other. More importantly, although Digicel’s customers can be readily identified as persons adversely affected by the loss to interconnectivity, the truth is that all networks connected to Digicel, and consequently all of their customers, were also affected, to the detriment of the entire sector.

___________