[cr-india] MoCIT sets terms for frequencies

[N.Ramakrishnan]

 >>Its not exactly unconstitutional. At best we can claim that it goes 
against spirit of prior SC views on this matter.<<
Very much so. While it is not unconstitutional, it is against the common 
good principle articulated by the SC: We should emphasize the principles 
of access, freedom of information and free speech inherent in the idea 
of community media.

 >.we should raise this with MoIB and see what their view is on this. 
obviously valuable to have them as an ally before going it alone.<<
Yes, but that's been a mixed blessing so far. More often than not, I 
have seen a 'sorry-we-tried-but-they're-not-listening-to-us'. As Sajan 
Venniyoor has pointed out on multiple occasions, there really aren't 
multiple flavours of government, or even a 'good' government versus a 
'bad' government. We can thrash around in the darkness and feel it's a 
rope or a pillar or a snake, as our fancy takes us - but in the end, 
it's the same elephant. They haven't tried very hard to settle matters 
with MHA, after all, which has already threatened CR with its revised 
FCRA Act.

 >>We saw a little bit of this rebellion at the fee hike time. (I think 
Varma even wrote a 'official' letter expressing surprise or something)<<
Hmm. I hesitate to call it a rebellion, or characterize that letter as 
having had any significant impact. But, yes, all in all it's probably 
good form to raise this with MIB first.

ramakrishnan

N.Ramakrishnan

Executive Director
Ideosync Media Combine
H.No.1381, Sector 37
Faridabad - 121 003
Haryana - India

Tel: +91-0129-4131883/4064883/4065883/6510156
Mobile: +91-9810273883
Web: www.ideosyncmedia.org
Twitter: @ideosyncmedia

On 07/02/14 12:42 PM, Ram Bhat wrote:
> I don't know on what grounds we'll challenge this.
> They are within their rights as per ITA 1885. Its not exactly 
> unconstitutional.
> At best we can claim that it goes against spirit of prior SC views on 
> this matter,
> and is against the spirit of MoIB's own policy guidelines, esp. the 
> guiding principles section (which unfortunately does not mention access)
> perhaps we can try telling them that this is politically a bad move, 
> but i don't know if we all have the energy to articulate this kind of 
> thing all over again (like we did when the fee was hiked)
> we should raise this with MoIB and see what their view is on this. 
> obviously valuable to have them as an ally before going it alone.
> i'm guessing they won't be happy with their colleagues at MoCIT 
> scuttling the CR sector at MoIB's expense.
> We saw a little bit of this rebellion at the fee hike time. (I think 
> Varma even wrote a 'official' letter expressing surprise or something)
>
> best,
>
> ---
> Ram
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 11:59 AM, N.Ramakrishnan 
> <nram at ideosyncmedia.org <mailto:nram at ideosyncmedia.org>> wrote:
>
>     I agree. I was going through the same document a few minutes ago,
>     and saw the same writing on the wall. What about a formal
>     representation to MoCIT questioning this? Anyone game for a
>     petition that challenges this, to be submitted to Kapil Sibal?
>     Ramakrishnan
>
>     N.Ramakrishnan
>
>     Executive Director
>     Ideosync Media Combine
>     H.No.1381, Sector 37
>     Faridabad - 121 003
>     Haryana - India
>
>     Tel: +91-0129-4131883/4064883/4065883/6510156
>     Mobile: +91-9810273883
>     Web:www.ideosyncmedia.org  <http://www.ideosyncmedia.org>
>     Twitter: @ideosyncmedia
>
>     On 07/02/14 10:55 AM, Ram Bhat wrote:
>>     Dear All,
>>     some of you may have received the CRFC newsletter,
>>     there's an interesting piece on new terms for frequencies
>>     allocated to CR
>>     http://crfc.in/mocit-sets-terms-for-frequencies/
>>
>>     The part that especially interests me:
>>     "Further, applicants will have to agree that the allotment of the
>>     spectrum would be withdrawn in the event the government deciding
>>     to allot spectrum through the auction process and that they would
>>     not be refunded the payment they make towards spectrum charges.
>>
>>     Lastly, the undertaking will require the applicants to agree that
>>     in the event of their losing the frequency, they would return the
>>     transmitting equipment or dispose it off, the procedure for which
>>     would be elaborated later."
>>
>>     there seems to be no protection even if a frequency is allotted.
>>     This is akin to the situation in Canada where frequencies of
>>     community radios maybe cancelled if a commercial station is given
>>     frequency in the same area, even at a later stage than CR
>>     allotment. Given the fallout after the 2G scam, I had expected
>>     that MoCIT will comment on pricing of frequencies in the new
>>     WOLs, but not revoking of already allocated spectrum. The fact
>>     that it has been slippped in to the new ToR of the WOL is a bad
>>     sign for the CR sector.
>>
>>     best,
>>
>>     ---
>>     Ram
>>
>>
>>     Join the Community Radio Forum. For membership details, please go towww.crforum.in  <http://www.crforum.in>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/cr-india_mail.sarai.net/attachments/20140207/415ac73a/attachment-0001.html>