REPORT
(b) to provide networking services.
(c) to provide network application services.
3. The Commission is proposed to be empowered with dispute resolution functions. It is also proposed to set up an Appellate Tribunal to be known as Communications Appellate Tribunal, to hear appeals against decisions or orders of the Commissioned order of civil liability imposed. The jurisdiction of the Appellate Tribunal may be exercised by it Benches, which shall ordinarily sit at Delhi and at such other places as may be notified. The Appellate Tribunal shall consist of a Chairperson and not more than six Members.
4. The Bill proposes to repeal the following legislation, namely:-
5. Keeping in view
the importance and the repercussion of the- Communication
Convergence Bill in future
on the country as a whole, the Committee invited
memoranda on the Bill from, the public in general and experts/professionals,
organisations/associations
representing Industry, Commerce, telecommunications,
electronic media and films etc. in particular for which the text of the Bill
was hoisted at
the website www.parliamentofindia.nic.in. Copies of the Bill were sent to
Leaders
of the political
parties in Lok
Sabha and Rajya
Sabha, to the Chief Secretaries of
different State Governments, to Supreme Court Bar Association, High Court
Bar Associations,
Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), leading Chambers
of
Commerce and Industry
in the country, Media Agencies and leading National
Newspapers, I.T. Companies and major Private Telecom Companies for their views
and suggestions,
if any.
6. Numerous memoranda/representations
were received. The committee invited
several organisations/Associations/Institutes/ Professionals/Experts/Individuals
for oral evidence.
In all 21 sittings of the Committee and 9 sittings of Sub-Committee
(which was constituted
by the Chairman for an in-depth study of the Bill and for its
Report) were held in which the representatives from various
Associations/Organisations/Institutes appeared before the Committee to tender
evidence. Besides,
representatives of the Department of. Telecommunications,
Department of Information Technology and Ministry of Information & Broadcasting
also appeared to
clarify certain provisions of the Bill.
7.
There were divergent views
on the various clauses and timing of the Bill. A
large number of witnesses including representatives of business organisations
like
Confederation of Indian Industry (CII), Indian Broadcasters Foundation (IBF)
and Indian Institute
of Management, Ahmedabad were of the view that the Bill was brought
too early and it was not the right time to have such an enabling and restrictive
legislation. They
held the view that Information Technology industry has made
tremendous progress simply because of the fact that there had been no intervention
from the Government,
Individuals and Corporate responded to the technology and
market conditions without any interference from the Government. Moreover,
they believed that
technology had been changing so fast that nobody could predict the
shape of things to come
in IT industry. These witnesses pleaded that this was not the
time to have such an enabling and restrictive legislation. Shri F.S. Nariman,
M.P. who headed
the Sub-Committee (set up by the Ministry of Communications) on draft
Communication Convergence
Bill has been of the view that for smooth functioning of
convergence, there should be convergence of concerned administrative ministries
and that Convergence
Commission of India formed under the Act should better consider
itself as "facilitator" instead of "regulator". The representatives of
Confederation of
Indian industry (CII) stated, "This is not the time to have such an enabling
and a restricted
legislation". The representatives of Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF)
too stated, "It
is too early in the day to have a bill of this kind". The representatives
of Internet Service
Provider Association of India (ISPAI) stated, "Looking at certain
apprehensions in so many
clauses, Bill would not serve the purpose of Internet
Service Providers". The representatives of Indian Institute of Management
(IIM, Ahmedabad)
said, "Bill is little too early". A Retired Member of Telecom
Commission also opposed
the Bill. The Technical Advisor on IT to Government of
Andhra Pradesh was of the opinion that for regulating content there was no
necessity of the
Bill.
8.
After a close perusal of the depositions of experts/professionals, organisations/associations
and individuals in the field of telecommunications and electronic media, the
Committee finds that opinion is sharply divided about the desirability of
having a Communication Commission of India at, this stage. Many of the prominent
witnesses apprehended that instead of being a facilitator in the growth of
Information Technology, the Commission may turn out to be a regulator and
may decelerate the growth of the industry. They are of the view
that this sector should
be left alone to develop itself by self-regulation. They asserted
that the Government intervention is not at all desirable at this stage.
However, it
is for the Government and ultimately for the Parliament to take a
decision but as the
Bill has been referred to the Committee by the Hon'ble
Speaker,
it proceeds to examine the Bill as follows: -
9. - Clause 1 is regarding short title, extent and commencement which states that "this Act may be called the Communication Convergence Act, 2001".
10. Some of the non-official witnesses pointed out that in the long run, it will be communication which will be dealt with and the word 'convergence' may lose its significance and above all it is a law on Communication and not Convergence. The Preamble also reads as "A Bill to promote, facilitate and develop in an orderly manner the carriage and content of communications". The Committee, therefore, pointed out to the Departmental representatives that after a certain time frame, the word 'Convergence' would look superfluous, so why not the word 'Convergence' be deleted from the title of the Bill.
11. In reply, Secretary, DoT stated that the Department wanted to focus on Communication and Broadcasting which are the essential features of the Bill. He further stated that the word convergence was incorporated in the title to bring out that convergence, was the focus of the Bill.
12. Secretary, I&B supplemented that if the word Convergence is not added and it is called Communication Bill, then there will be confusion that the Press is also covered which is not the intention.
13. The Committee is of the opinion that 'convergence' is already a reality and in view of the long-term relevance of the provisions of the Bill, the enactment should be termed as the Communication Act to avoid redundancy of the term 'convergence' later. The Committee has also, in the following paragraphs, recommended specific exclusion of the Press from the operation o' the provisions of this law. Hence, the Committee recommends that in clause 1 Communication Convergence Act, 2001" be substituted with the word:- "The Communications Act, 2002".