Is BRTI independent?

Is BRTI independent?

Indonesian Telecommunications Society (Mastel) chairman Giri
Suseno, during a hearing with House of Representatives Commission
IV overseeing telecommunications, questioned the independence of
the Telecommunications Regulatory Body (BRTI), as reported in The
Jakarta Post, Dec. 4.

He said that under the current structure, the BRTI was weak,
given that the director general of post and telecommunications
Djamhari Sirat, as chairman of the body's regulatory committee,
could influence the body's decision-making process.

He also suggested the adoption of the Australian model for
regulatory bodies, which was flexible and applicable to
Indonesia, but he failed to provide details.

I agree with him, as the dual role of Djamhari clearly
obstructs objectivity and independence.

As for the Australian regulatory body model, it is called the
Office of Regulator-General (ORG) and was established in 1994
under ORG Act 1994 chaired by a regulator-general.

The ORG does not regulate only a single public utility, but
covers all utilities such as water, gas, railway system,
electricity, port system and grain. Each of these utilities is
regulated under a separate act and an independent ORG.

The above example is of the regulatory office in Victoria, one
of the six states of Australia. Telecommunications is not
included in the ORG's scope of work, because Australian
telecommunications giant Telstra had been privatized before the
establishment of the ORG. However, the thrust of the regulatory
framework is that the ORG is independent of the government, and
is accountable directly to the Australian parliament.

The proposal to adopt the Australian model was indeed very
appropriate in the sense that the abovementioned utility sectors
are prone to price hikes at the expense of consumers.

It was one day after July 17, 2003 -- which marked the day the
Minister of Communications Agum Gumelar inaugurated the long-
awaited telecommunications regulatory body -- Djamhari made a
statement that astonished the general public, to the effect that
the BRTI committee would soon raise telephone rates, something
that went against public interests. This statement clearly showed
the questionable independence of the regulatory body.

M. RUSDI
Jakarta