March 2014 - KICTANet

Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response
by Wainaina Mungai 31 Mar '14

31 Mar '14

Japheth, The issue is not the "persons" - but more of the regulator as a body/institution needs to be truly independent and free of government control or business owner influences/bullying. The persons occupying the offices must be empowered and protected by the law for us to achieve. *(5) Parliament shall enact legislation that provides for the establishment of a body, which shall--* *(a) be independent of control by **government**, **political interests** or **commercial interests**; *(b) reflect the interests of all sections of the society; and **(c) set media standards and regulate compliance with those standards. Wainaina On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Consumers Federation of Kenya (COFEK) < hotline(a)cofek.co.ke> wrote: > Great comments, and to the point - wish the "right" people can apply to be > considered as board members of the would be "new" regulator > > > > Japheth > > > > *From:* kictanet [mailto:kictanet-bounces+hotline= > cofek.co.ke(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke] *On Behalf Of *Wyne Bar > *Sent:* Monday, March 31, 2014 9:23 AM > *To:* The Consumers Federation of Kenya (Cofek) > > *Cc:* KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions > *Subject:* Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK > Response > > > > I have kept off this debate because of vested interests by several parties > claiming to be making objective analyses. On this list, there's little, if > any, objectivity in the matter of Signal Distribution licensing and > #DigitalMigrationKE as a whole. I will therefore abstain from making direct > comment on the ruling, STBs, Tenders, BSD licences or the Switch-Off date. > > Instead, I propose we focus on the new regulator. Six years ago, we had a > somewhat related debate (copied below) about Media Owners versus Editorial > Freedom. > > The matter of what really constitutes 'media freedom' came up in 2012/13 > as it did in 2008 around the election period. It came up again during > debates on Media Laws as media owners presented their grievances. We forget > to sort out media regulation in fair weather. > > After the ruling by the Supreme Court enforcing Section 34 of the > Constitution, what we may want to ensure as "Consumers of media", is that > the new regulator will be truly "independent" and yet "powerful"...cannot > be influenced by Media Owners or Government etc and can make & enforce bold > decisions. > > If we get the composition, independence and (power) of the new regulator > wrong, nothing else we debate here about Signal Distribution, investor > protection or consumer rights will be of any consequence in protecting > consumers from rogue media or a rogue government. > > On Broadcasting, the cliché "content is king" still holds and whether or > not BSD licence goes to local private media, the right to > access/rebroadcast their FTA content must remain with the Broadcaster. That > is also true for upcoming content producers who need protection of their > content from other players along the value chain. As we debate the issues, > let us remember there are many players in the Digital Broadcasting value > chain. > > As the ruling has proved, the REGULATOR is a critical player in the > industry. Let us all help to put together a regulator that will guarantee > justice, innovation and all our ICT aspirations as a country. > > **This is my personal position as a Kenyan consumer of media...and my > views do not represent any media house; or group of Broadcasters** > > Have a regulated day, > > Wainaina > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Wainaina Mungai <wainaina(a)madeinkenya.org> > Date: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 > Subject: [kictanet] Kenya: The Media is Not Innocent > To: wainaina.mungai(a)gmail.com > Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> > > > Allow me to re-deflect the issue away from a specific media house and > state the following as a way forward: > > 1. Journalists must work with all Kenyans to make the press free from > undue influence from Media Owners. Press Freedom will not be achieved until > we liberate the journalists from the editorial biases of the media owners. > > 2. Editors must be held responsible when media houses publish/broadcast in > an unethical manner. For this to hold, we must ensure that the media owners > are not the 'final' editors. > > 3. Journalists/reporters have developed a culture of accepting inducements > in order to edit stories as requested. This must be treated as a crime due > to the privileges society accords the press. > > 4. Media houses must employ and retrain qualified and ethical staff. There > must be standards that ensure professionalism. Engineers, Doctors and > others submit to standards that the media continues to dodge. > > 5. Kenya needs a Media Council "with teeth"...that will be a watchdog that > acts in the interest of the public not as a affiliate lobby for Media > Owners. > > The verdict should be a clear message to all of us in the media circles. > It's time to look inwards and liberate the profession of journalism from > the businessmen who own the media houses. > > Wainaina > > > > > On 2/13/08, Wainaina Mungai <wainaina.mungai(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Thanks Farida, > > > > We should not consider the presence of lessos in ballot boxes in Kajiado > or Kamukunji as evidence that your story was true. The pre-marking or > ballots and the lesso story are what would be considered mutually exclusive > events. The use of lessos as indicator of accuracy is at the very least > speculative. The fact that [it is possible] for an election to be stolen > does not mean that and election [will be] stolen. > > > > For KTN/Standard, the more direct issues as you vouch for the integrity > of your story would be: > > > > 1. Did you have [evidence] that the ballot boxes were stuffed with > pre-marked ballot papers? or were you speculating because someone came > forward as a "witness"? > > > > > > 2. Do you believe that the killings of the Administration Police in > Nyanza were a direct result of the story you authorised? If so, what have > you done to at least console the families of the bereaved policemen? > > > > > > 3. Did you have evidence that the Citi Hoppa buses that were carrying > APs to various parts of the country were meant to be used for a rigging > mission? and would you consider that your story was responsible for the > burning of Citi Hoppa buses? > > > > > > Most voters know that ballot boxes are checked before the start of > voting and sealed infront of witnesses (agents, ECK officials etc). It is > therefore unlikely that rigging would only take place is unless there is an > elaborate conspiracy involving [all] officials/agents at a polling station. > > > > Overall, the "vibes" KTN/Standard fraternity must contend with is not > that they are a model of "free press" but that it is biased against the > government or pro-ODM. The vibes stations such as Royal Media, Kameme and > KBC contend with is that they have given Kenyans reason to be seen as > pro-government/PNU. Those are the issues the press must address honestly > and not hide behind tags and clichés such as 'press freedom' and 'muzzling > the press'. > > > > NOTE: I work for a competing media house but that is not my motivation > for the issues i have raised on KTN/Standard. I respect journalists for the > effort that goes into writing even the simplest story. However, I am aware > that media houses and journalists have continued to allow their political > and other biases to influence the way they report stories. > > > > Wainaina > > > > On Feb 14, 2008 12:09 AM, Farida Karoney <fkaroney(a)ktnkenya.com> wrote: > > > > Wainaina > > I personally authorised the story you are blaming KTN for and can vouch > for the integrity of that report any time. If indeed you believe it is not > possible to steal an election, how come that ballot boxes were found with > lessos, and election materials in some polling stations? > > > > We cannot resolve explosive issues by hiding or supressing the truth, > and no one is trying to exonerate the press. Let us not pretend that we do > not know why we are where we are, it is definately not because of KTN or > the Standard Group. > > > > And it is certainly not an academic excercise, afterall most of us do > not have another place to call home except Kenya. Believe me, any Country > which calls itself democratic must be able to live with a free press, no > matter how much of a nuisance it is. > > > > By all means industry players need mechanisms to promote responsible > behaviour in the media but aggression against media houses in light of the > current political crisis is in my opinion misplaced. > > > > regards > > Farida > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Wainaina Mungai > > > > This message was sent to: wainaina(a)madeinkenya.org > > Unsubscribe or change your options at > http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/wainaina%40madeinkenya… > > > > > > -- > > > On Sunday, March 30, 2014, Ngigi Waithaka <ngigi(a)at.co.ke> wrote: > > Guys, > > > > If an organization by the then name of CCK had done its homework and had > greed not been the overriding factor in issuing the Digital Licenses, we > would not be in the mess that we are in today, where Wanjiku has lost big > time. > > > > Any smart person @CCK would have foreseen what has happened the moment > the current broadcasters lost the bid for the digital broadcasting license. > You cannot wish away such a large fish swimming in the pool. The smart > thing would be to work with the big fish as you rear other fish and only > confront the big fish once you have other sizeable fish in that pool. > > > > They say "...The law is an ass..." and I can't think of a more > applicable case than this! > > > > Way forward: > > 1. Issue the local broadcasters the Digital License. This gets them out > of the way > > 2. Issue similar Licenses to Signet and that other Chinese firm > > 3. Get sober minds at CAK. If we don't do this, we wouldn't have a > regulator to talk about in the next couple of months. > > 4. And let the conspicuously absent CS ICT to take charge. There is not > a single *BIG* deal that touches ICT that can go through without hullabaloo! > > > > Exactly whats is hard in doing this? > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Bernard Kioko [Bernsoft Group] < > bkioko(a)bernsoft.com> wrote: > >> > >> David, > >> > >> > >> > >> You have summarized it well. > >> > >> > >> > >> Perhaps the benefit of what happened yesterday is that at the Supreme > Court, sanity will carry the day without the option of going to any other > court thereafter. It appeared to me like that's the "the plan" . Then > again, is this wishful thinking on my part. > >> > >> > >> > >> Regards > >> > >> > >> > >> From: kictanet [mailto:kictanet-bounces+bkioko= > bernsoft.com(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke] On Behalf Of David Makali > >> Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2014 11:40 AM > >> To: bkioko(a)bernsoft.com > >> Cc: kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > >> > >> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK > Response > >> > >> > >> > >> The court exceeded its mandate and sowed more confusion: > >> > >> > >> > >> 1. By legitimizing the expectation of the media owners for a license > and proceeding to grant it one uncompetitively. So, why did the const > require vetting of judges who were in office by 2010? They had a legitimate > expectation to continue working into pensionhood, having held their > positions for years. The pt: the constitution erased all preferential > expectations and set a new standard because of grievances over legitimacy > and competence of the status quo. In the case of ICT/ broadcasting, > similar questions lie over the evenness of the ground. The "competitive" > standard in the award of any public resource or positions is to address > such issues. > >> > >> > >> > >> 2. By simply voiding the rights of PANG which had been issued a license > pursuant to a competitive process, however conducted by an "illegal" cck, > and disregarding the injustice and financial consequences of such a > decision. Why uphold the rights of one party and extinguish the rights of > others? The court's Sympathy only seemed to lie on one side for which it > poured out its heart generously, but totally ignored the rights of Pang and > its subscribers. A middle ground position, recognizing the predicament of > the current media investors and a suitable remedy to the injustice it found > committed against them by cck would have sufficed to put the country on a > forward footing. But this? The next Destination seems to be the Supreme > Court, which am afraid is going to be choking soon with many unnecessary > petitions, thanks to the court of appeal's contestable strokes of justice. > Pang, a subscriber, another investors, or even "cofek's" unrecognized > consumers have more than enough ground the way I see it. > >> > >> > >> > >> 3. By failing to admonish the govt for its confused policy (chaotic > really) and confirming how dangerous it is to invest n this country, in ict > particularly, because it has protected investors, and others are secondary > regardless of the processes, which are now routinely reversed. > >> > >> Unsubscribe or change your options at > https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/ngigi%40at.co.ke > >> > >> The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform > for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and > regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT > sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. > >> > >> KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors > online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, > share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do > not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications. > > > > > > > > -- > > Regards, > > Waithaka Ngigi > > Chief Executive Officer | Alliance Technologies | MCK Nairobi Synod > Building > > T + 254 (0) 20 2333 471 |Office Mobile: +254 786 28 28 28 | M + 254 737 > 811 000 > > www.at.co.ke > > < > https://ci5.googleusercontent.com/proxy/Klzt0M0J4ArCmV6P9nQpTWHWBBTkFaGwX5_… > > > > >

1 0

Corporatising activism
by ICT Researcher 31 Mar '14

31 Mar '14

No wonder NGOs are the world's most trusted institution. As governments attack and defund the NGOs that are more critical, mainstream groups are reassuring governments with pragmatic goals, comforting consumers with feel-good labeling and cause marketing, and partnering with corporations. "Corporatized activism is shoring up big business, sustaining capitalist states, and building support for a lightly-reformed status-quo. It threatens no one in power. But it weakens grassroots activism and poses a major threat to those who are struggling to transform the world." http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2014-03-24-lebaron-en.html

1 0

A Poison Pill for Safaricom's QoS woes? Will Collymore blink?
by Ali Hussein 31 Mar '14

31 Mar '14

The Kenyan Regulator has presented Safaricom with a catch22 situation:- Sort out your QoS issues or we will slap you with punitive fines..and by the way we just might not renew your license! Oh...Also note that for you to be able to sort out your QoS issues you need more frequency than you (or us) currently have. Wait a minute! There might just be a way out of this conundrum! Acquire yumobile assets (which include frequencies). However before we approve your acquisition of these assets which will improve your QoS issues you MUST open up the Safaricom Agent Network. Question: is it the business of the regulator to ask companies to open up their hard earned Agent Networks? Is this akin to the Central Bank asking a dominant bank to allow its branches to be operated jointly by other banks? Or should the regulator focus on interoperability of the technology network? Ali Hussein +254 0770 906375 / 0713 601113 Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim Blog: www.alyhussein.com "I fear the day technology will surpass human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots". ~ Albert Einstein Sent from my iPad

1 0

Unsubscribe
by kagirijane＠yahoo.com 30 Mar '14

30 Mar '14

Kindly unsubscribe me from the mailing list. Sent from my iPad > On Mar 30, 26 Heisei, at 20:39, kictanet-request(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke wrote: > > Send kictanet mailing list submissions to > kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > kictanet-request(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > > You can reach the person managing the list at > kictanet-owner(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of kictanet digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response > (Ngigi Waithaka) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2014 20:34:59 +0300 > From: Ngigi Waithaka <ngigi(a)at.co.ke> > To: Bernard Kioko <bkioko(a)bernsoft.com> > Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> > Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK > Response > Message-ID: > <CAMzLdAPErttTwBOVzarLHtdh87FAfh2oykOcpiLwNz-YtJGw1g(a)mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Guys, > > If an organization by the then name of CCK had done its homework and had > greed not been the overriding factor in issuing the Digital Licenses, we > would not be in the mess that we are in today, where Wanjiku has lost big > time. > > Any smart person @CCK would have foreseen what has happened the moment the > current broadcasters lost the bid for the digital broadcasting license. You > cannot wish away such a large fish swimming in the pool. The smart thing > would be to work with the big fish as you rear other fish and only confront > the big fish once you have other sizeable fish in that pool. > > They say "...The law is an ass..." and I can't think of a more applicable > case than this! > > Way forward: > 1. Issue the local broadcasters the Digital License. This gets them out of > the way > 2. Issue similar Licenses to Signet and that other Chinese firm > 3. Get sober minds at CAK. If we don't do this, we wouldn't have a > regulator to talk about in the next couple of months. > 4. And let the conspicuously absent CS ICT to take charge. There is not a > single *BIG* deal that touches ICT that can go through without hullabaloo! > > Exactly whats is hard in doing this? > > > On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Bernard Kioko [Bernsoft Group] < > bkioko(a)bernsoft.com> wrote: > >> David, >> >> >> >> You have summarized it well. >> >> >> >> Perhaps the benefit of what happened yesterday is that at the Supreme >> Court, sanity will carry the day without the option of going to any other >> court thereafter. It appeared to me like that's the "the plan" . Then >> again, is this wishful thinking on my part. >> >> >> >> Regards >> >> >> >> *From:* kictanet [mailto:kictanet-bounces+bkioko= >> bernsoft.com(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke] *On Behalf Of *David Makali >> *Sent:* Saturday, March 29, 2014 11:40 AM >> *To:* bkioko(a)bernsoft.com >> *Cc:* kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >> >> *Subject:* Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK >> Response >> >> >> >> The court exceeded its mandate and sowed more confusion: >> >> >> >> 1. By legitimizing the expectation of the media owners for a license and >> proceeding to grant it one uncompetitively. So, why did the const require >> vetting of judges who were in office by 2010? They had a legitimate >> expectation to continue working into pensionhood, having held their >> positions for years. The pt: the constitution erased all preferential >> expectations and set a new standard because of grievances over legitimacy >> and competence of the status quo. In the case of ICT/ broadcasting, >> similar questions lie over the evenness of the ground. The "competitive" >> standard in the award of any public resource or positions is to address >> such issues. >> >> >> >> 2. By simply voiding the rights of PANG which had been issued a license >> pursuant to a competitive process, however conducted by an "illegal" cck, >> and disregarding the injustice and financial consequences of such a >> decision. Why uphold the rights of one party and extinguish the rights of >> others? The court's Sympathy only seemed to lie on one side for which it >> poured out its heart generously, but totally ignored the rights of Pang and >> its subscribers. A middle ground position, recognizing the predicament of >> the current media investors and a suitable remedy to the injustice it found >> committed against them by cck would have sufficed to put the country on a >> forward footing. But this? The next Destination seems to be the Supreme >> Court, which am afraid is going to be choking soon with many unnecessary >> petitions, thanks to the court of appeal's contestable strokes of justice. >> Pang, a subscriber, another investors, or even "cofek's" unrecognized >> consumers have more than enough ground the way I see it. >> >> >> >> 3. By failing to admonish the govt for its confused policy (chaotic >> really) and confirming how dangerous it is to invest n this country, in ict >> particularly, because it has protected investors, and others are secondary >> regardless of the processes, which are now routinely reversed. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> This is official mail. If you doubt the content, call back on >> +254722517540. >> >> >> On Mar 29, 2014, at 10:15 AM, Dennis Kioko <dmbuvi(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Very interesting Grace. >> >> >> >> Was the court well versed on the whole digital migration process, spectrum >> and the fact that spectrum is a resource that belongs to all Kenyans, and >> not a few organisations? >> >> On Saturday, 29 March 2014, Grace Githaiga <ggithaiga(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> @Kioko, I quoted this sentence because I just didnt believe that a court >> of law can disregard the fact that there are rules to tendering processes. >> Inaonekana mambo ni yale yale! >> >> >> "An independent body should therefore give them a licence without going >> through the tender process provided they comply with the regulations," Mr >> Justice Maraga said. >> ------------------------------ >> >> Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 09:26:13 +0300 >> From: dmbuvi(a)gmail.com >> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK >> Response >> CC: kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >> To: ggithaiga(a)hotmail.com >> >> The court ruling as reported in the Daily Nation article is quite >> confusing. >> >> First, the court is asking the government to reimburse PANG and StarTimes >> for their licensing fee and investments. How much will this cost the tax >> payer? >> >> Second, the court in supporting its ruling, says media owners have >> invested a lot and they shouldn't lose their investment. The media owners >> will still lose their investment as digital broadcasting is a new >> technology that requires new infrastructure - perhaps the only >> infrastructure that can be reused is the towers. >> >> Third, is the court implying that licenses issued by CCK are >> unconstitutional? >> >> >> >> On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Ali Hussein <ali(a)hussein.me.ke> wrote: >> >> Listers >> >> >> >> Lets step back and ask a few fundamental questions:- >> >> >> >> 1. How has CAK contravened the constitution in regards to the digital >> migration. >> >> >> >> 2. How does this affect the country in the scheme of things in relation to >> the global move to digital migration. >> >> >> >> 3. How does it benefit the consumer when we continue to perpetuate a >> status quo in the media space where a few big boys muscle out everyone? >> Maybe Consumer Federation can expound on this. >> >> >> >> 4. How can we ensure going forward that the tendering processes are >> air-tight and can withstand frivolous suits. In light of what happened to >> the laptop tender we must ask a fundamental question: >> >> >> >> IS THIS GOVERNMENT SETTING ITSELF UP TO FAIL IN THE OCT SECTOR? >> >> >> >> *Ali Hussein* >> >> >> >> +254 0770 906375 / 0713 601113 >> >> >> >> Twitter: @AliHKassim >> >> Skype: abu-jomo >> >> LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim >> >> Blog: www.alyhussein.com >> >> >> >> "I fear the day technology will surpass human interaction. The world will >> have a generation of idiots". ~ Albert Einstein >> >> >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> >> On Mar 29, 2014, at 1:53 AM, Grace Githaiga <ggithaiga(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Victory-for-Kenyans-as-judges-halt-rush-to-dig… >> >> "An independent body should therefore give them a licence without going >> through the tender process provided they comply with the regulations," Mr >> Justice Maraga said. >> >> >> >> Really? How now? >> ------------------------------ >> >> From: jgmbugua(a)gmail.com >> Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 23:36:37 +0300 >> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK >> Response >> CC: kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >> To: ggithaiga(a)hotmail.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Idiocy of the highest order. There is no win here only delay of the >> inevitable and stifling of innovation and investment. >> >> Multichoice is certainly a winner. >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> >> *From: *Consumers Federation of Kenya (COFEK)< >> >> _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list >> kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Unsubscribe or >> change your options at >> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/ggithaiga%40hotmail.c… Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for >> people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and >> regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT >> sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and >> development. KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable >> behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and >> bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect >> privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications. >> >> >> >> -- >> with Regards: >> >> >> >> blog.denniskioko.com <http://www.denniskioko.com/> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> kictanet mailing list >> kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet >> >> Unsubscribe or change your options at >> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/dmakali%40yahoo.com >> >> The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform >> for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and >> regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT >> sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. >> >> KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors >> online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, >> share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do >> not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications. >> >> >> * ------------------------------ * >> >> >> >> This e-mail and any attachments may contain information that is >> confidential, legally privileged and protected by law and is intended for >> the sole use of the named recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, or >> disclosure or distribution is prohibited. Any liability (in negligence or >> otherwise) arising from any third party acting, or refraining from acting >> on any information contained in this email is hereby excluded. If you are >> not the intended recipient, please delete the contents and notify the >> sender immediately; do not disclose the contents to any other person, use >> it for any purpose or store or copy the information in any medium. Whilst >> our e-mails are checked for viruses, we cannot guarantee that this message >> or any attachment is virus free, does not contain malicious code or is >> incompatible with your electronic system and the Company does not accept >> liability in respect of viruses, malicious code or any related problems >> that you might experience. For further information about us, please contact >> us at the address indicated below. >> >> >> Bernsoft Interactive Limited - P O Box 15177-00100 Nairobi - Tel: +254 722 >> 929192 Email: admin(a)bernsoft.com Web: www.bernsoft.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> kictanet mailing list >> kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet >> >> Unsubscribe or change your options at >> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/ngigi%40at.co.ke >> >> The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform >> for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and >> regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT >> sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. >> >> KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors >> online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, >> share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do >> not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications. > > > > -- > *Regards,* > > *Wait**haka Ngigi* > Chief Executive Officer | Alliance Technologies | MCK Nairobi Synod Building > T + 254 (0) 20 2333 471 |Office Mobile: +254 786 28 28 28 | M + 254 737 811 > 000 > www.at.co.ke >

1 0

Re: [kictanet] Appeal Court Decision to anarchic sector
by wgikunju＠gmail.com 30 Mar '14

30 Mar '14

You're spreading false alarm ICT researcher, the Judges offered remedy for PANG, and directed that the government should comply with the Constitution to legally constitute a 'CCK' with authority to regulate the industry. Please read the judgement in full. --WG -----Original message----- From: ICT Researcher Sent: 30/03/2014, 3:10 pm To: wgikunju(a)gmail.com Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions Subject: [kictanet] Appeal Court Decision to anarchic sector Just watching http://www.citizennews.co.ke/news/2012/local/item/18216-appeal-court-orders… 1. Declared CCK media regulatory role illegal 2. Court cancelled licensed earlier issued to PANG 3. Court awards 3 a license exempted from competitive bidding process 4. Court give license subject to same terms and conditions 5. Court rushes next year's switch off date to September this year Since the court declared CCK illegal, will the same court assume implementation role including migration process? Foreign investors in Kenya have cause to be very worried.

3 3

Appeal Court Decision to anarchic sector
by ICT Researcher 30 Mar '14

30 Mar '14

Just watching http://www.citizennews.co.ke/news/2012/local/item/18216-appeal-court-orders… 1. Declared CCK media regulatory role illegal 2. Court cancelled licensed earlier issued to PANG 3. Court awards 3 a license exempted from competitive bidding process 4. Court give license subject to same terms and conditions 5. Court rushes next year's switch off date to September this year Since the court declared CCK illegal, will the same court assume implementation role including migration process? Foreign investors in Kenya have cause to be very worried.

1 0

Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response
by wgikunju＠gmail.com 30 Mar '14

30 Mar '14

Dear all; I have been following the robust debate here since the Court ruling and Cofek's response, and i'm impressed by the quality of arguements put forth. Let me declare my interest, I'm an editor at the NMG, but i speak here in my private capacity. Im also a consumer of television broadcasts. But so are you all kictanetters, you're both interested parties in this matter of digital migration, as well as consumers of TV broadcasts. Unfortunately, i find your take on this matter elitist, completely biased and humanly selfish. You forget that a court of law makes judgement after weighing all interests at stake, and is ultimately guided by the letter of law, and the public interest. The major media houses have not at all been against digital migration. They have only been against the hurried manner in which the process has been pushed through by the CCK, and the less than transparent award of licenses to third parties to the contemptous exemption of the major broadcasters and investors in the industry. Ladies and gentlemen, from you posh houses and offices in upmarket Nairobi estates you forget that KSh5,000 is a fortune for most Kenyan households, which cannot be spent on a set top box while there are other most pressing basic needs. This is a reality that even rich economies like the USA chose not to run away from, and they issued vouchers for digital boxes for those households that couldn't afford them. Their migration had to be postponed severally to ensure no household was left behind. What happened even to the proposal to scrap taxes on these boxes, which could have halved the cost? Have you, kictanetters, in your eagerness to make a quick buck from the new digital world, forgotten that more than half of kenyans live on less than Sh105 ($1.25) per day, yet they also crave for and have a right to watch TV? what the court of appeal found was a CCK bent on bulldozing a critical process, and ruled that on a balance, it would hurt public interest more to continue than to pause, be more consultative and carry everyone on board like the civilised and accomodative society that Kenya is supposed to be. Rgds, --WG -----Original message----- From: Network of non- formal Educational institutions Sent: 30/03/2014, 9:19 am To: wgikunju(a)gmail.com Cc: kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response Dear ALL It is very sad indeed. As a major stakeholder, I think the courts did not balance. It looked more on the purported injustice of the major media houses and ignored the broader goal of digital migration. With regards to CCK all government institutions are moving towards complying to the constitution. And CCK will pass over the work and programs they have been implementing to the new body once it is formed in a smooth process that will not destroy the gains so far. What the courts have done is destroying all gains through this. I have a feeling that very many Kenyans and professionals/institutions have very little knowledge on Digital migration. The courts included. CCK should offer a sensitization/ awareness forum on Digital migration to judges. The consumers have lost because what the major media may do is to have all the channels they would think of just as they have done on radio. The consumer will miss diversity in content and programing. How about young and upcoming medai houses. Will they ever have a chance in the meddial of these major houses. Talk of monopoly by the major houses that would always want to keep the status quo Jane On Sunday, March 30, 2014 6:51 AM, Ali Hussein <ali(a)hussein.me.ke> wrote: Bernard Don't bet on it. Unfortunately I'm coming to a sad conclusion regarding the judiciary. In its attempt to show how 'independent' it is we are seeing a move towards an 'activist judiciary' which negates the very reason why we went through such a painful reform process in the judiciary. All I can say now is GOD HELP KENYA. Ali Hussein +254 0770 906375 / 0713 601113 Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassimBlog: www.alyhussein.com "I fear the day technology will surpass human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots". ~ Albert Einstein Sent from my iPad On Mar 29, 2014, at 11:57 AM, "Bernard Kioko [Bernsoft Group]" <bkioko(a)bernsoft.com> wrote: David, You have summarized it well. Perhaps the benefit of what happened yesterday is that at the Supreme Court, sanity will carry the day without the option of going to any other court thereafter. It appeared to me like that’s the “the plan” . Then again, is this wishful thinking on my part. Regards From:kictanet [mailto:kictanet-bounces+bkioko=bernsoft.com@lists.kictanet.or.ke] On Behalf Of David Makali Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2014 11:40 AM To: bkioko(a)bernsoft.com Cc: kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response The court exceeded its mandate and sowed more confusion: 1. By legitimizing the expectation of the media owners for a license and proceeding to grant it one uncompetitively. So, why did the const require vetting of judges who were in office by 2010? They had a legitimate expectation to continue working into pensionhood, having held their positions for years. The pt: the constitution erased all preferential expectations and set a new standard because of grievances over legitimacy and competence of the status quo. In the case of ICT/ broadcasting, similar questions lie over the evenness of the ground. The "competitive" standard in the award of any public resource or positions is to address such issues. 2. By simply voiding the rights of PANG which had been issued a license pursuant to a competitive process, however conducted by an "illegal" cck, and disregarding the injustice and financial consequences of such a decision. Why uphold the rights of one party and extinguish the rights of others? The court's Sympathy only seemed to lie on one side for which it poured out its heart generously, but totally ignored the rights of Pang and its subscribers. A middle ground position, recognizing the predicament of the current media investors and a suitable remedy to the injustice it found committed against them by cck would have sufficed to put the country on a forward footing. But this? The next Destination seems to be the Supreme Court, which am afraid is going to be choking soon with many unnecessary petitions, thanks to the court of appeal's contestable strokes of justice. Pang, a subscriber, another investors, or even "cofek's" unrecognized consumers have more than enough ground the way I see it. 3. By failing to admonish the govt for its confused policy (chaotic really) and confirming how dangerous it is to invest n this country, in ict particularly, because it has protected investors, and others are secondary regardless of the processes, which are now routinely reversed. This is official mail. If you doubt the content, call back on +254722517540. On Mar 29, 2014, at 10:15 AM, Dennis Kioko <dmbuvi(a)gmail.com> wrote: Very interesting Grace. > >Was the court well versed on the whole digital migration process, spectrum and the fact that spectrum is a resource that belongs to all Kenyans, and not a few organisations? > >On Saturday, 29 March 2014, Grace Githaiga <ggithaiga(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >@Kioko, I quoted this sentence because I just didnt believe that a court of law can disregard the fact that there are rules to tendering processes. Inaonekana mambo ni yale yale! > >“An independent body should therefore give them a licence without going through the tender process provided they comply with the regulations,” Mr Justice Maraga said. > >________________________________ > >Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 09:26:13 +0300 >From: dmbuvi(a)gmail.com >Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response >CC: kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >To: ggithaiga(a)hotmail.com > >The court ruling as reported in the Daily Nation article is quite confusing. > >First, the court is asking the government to reimburse PANG and StarTimes for their licensing fee and investments. How much will this cost the tax payer? > >Second, the court in supporting its ruling, says media owners have invested a lot and they shouldn't lose their investment. The media owners will still lose their investment as digital broadcasting is a new technology that requires new infrastructure - perhaps the only infrastructure that can be reused is the towers. > >Third, is the court implying that licenses issued by CCK are unconstitutional? > >On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Ali Hussein <ali(a)hussein.me.ke> wrote: >Listers > >Lets step back and ask a few fundamental questions:- > >1. How has CAK contravened the constitution in regards to the digital migration. > >2. How does this affect the country in the scheme of things in relation to the global move to digital migration. > >3. How does it benefit the consumer when we continue to perpetuate a status quo in the media space where a few big boys muscle out everyone? Maybe Consumer Federation can expound on this. > >4. How can we ensure going forward that the tendering processes are air-tight and can withstand frivolous suits. In light of what happened to the laptop tender we must ask a fundamental question: > >IS THIS GOVERNMENT SETTING ITSELF UP TO FAIL IN THE OCT SECTOR? > >Ali Hussein > >+254 0770 906375 / 0713 601113 > >Twitter: @AliHKassim >Skype: abu-jomo >LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim >Blog: www.alyhussein.com > >"I fear the day technology will surpass human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots". ~ Albert Einstein > >Sent from my iPad > >On Mar 29, 2014, at 1:53 AM, Grace Githaiga <ggithaiga(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >>http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Victory-for-Kenyans-as-judges-halt-rush-to-dig… >>“An independent body should therefore give them a licence without going through the tender process provided they comply with the regulations,” Mr Justice Maraga said. >> >>Really? How now? >> >>________________________________ >> >>From: jgmbugua(a)gmail.com >>Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 23:36:37 +0300 >>Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response >>CC: kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >>To: ggithaiga(a)hotmail.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>Idiocy of the highest order. There is no win here only delay of the inevitable and stifling of innovation and investment. >> >>Multichoice is certainly a winner. >> >> >> >>________________________________ >> >> >>From: Consumers Federation of Kenya (COFEK)< >_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/ggithaiga%40hotmail.c… The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications. > > >-- >with Regards: > >blog.denniskioko.com > > _______________________________________________ >kictanet mailing list >kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet > >Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/dmakali%40yahoo.com > >The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. > >KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications. ________________________________ This e-mail and any attachments may contain information that is confidential, legally privileged and protected by law and is intended for the sole use of the named recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, or disclosure or distribution is prohibited. Any liability (in negligence or otherwise) arising from any third party acting, or refraining from acting on any information contained in this email is hereby excluded. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the contents and notify the sender immediately; do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose or store or copy the information in any medium. Whilst our e-mails are checked for viruses, we cannot guarantee that this message or any attachment is virus free, does not contain malicious code or is incompatible with your electronic system and the Company does not accept liability in respect of viruses, malicious code or any related problems that you might experience. For further information about us, please contact us at the address indicated below. Bernsoft Interactive Limited - P O Box 15177-00100 Nairobi - Tel: +254 722 929192 Email: admin(a)bernsoft.com Web: www.bernsoft.com _______________________________________________ >kictanet mailing list >kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet > >Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/info%40alyhussein.com > >The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. > >KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications. _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/nnfeischools%40yahoo.… The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.

5 4

Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response
by wgikunju＠gmail.com 30 Mar '14

30 Mar '14

Thats true Rad, there will always be an under-priveledged group in society, but can we (government) carry them along to some reasonable distance, make sure we have at least four-fifths of Kenyan households on board, before takeoff? Of what use/impact would digital migration be if we locked out 70% of Kenyans from watchin TV? Have even our policy makers become so elitist (and eager to cut deals with the Chinese) that they forget the importance of inclusion? Surely even making a strong case to the Treasury for scrapping of taxes would have been a reasonable step/effort.., or even mass importation of the most basic digital boxes by government for the very low-income, for sale at cost? I know most on this list are thinking, what is 5k? My friends, its a fortune for most Kenyan households. It would take a sincere effort to raise that amount... The most unfortunate thing is that all details of the shenanigans behind this hurried digital migration and award of licenses, just like the incorrigbly corrupt laptops tender, may never fully come to public light. --WG -----Original message----- From: Rad! Sent: 30/03/2014, 1:26 pm To: wgikunju(a)gmail.com Cc: kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response But Mr Wagikunju what you say is absolutely true. But it will still be true whether digital migration is done in 2014 or 2024. On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 1:11 PM, wgikunju(a)gmail.com <wgikunju(a)gmail.com>wrote: > Dear all; > I have been following the robust debate here since the Court ruling and > Cofek's response, and i'm impressed by the quality of arguements put forth. > Let me declare my interest, I'm an editor at the NMG, but i speak here in > my private capacity. Im also a consumer of television broadcasts. > But so are you all kictanetters, you're both interested parties in this > matter of digital migration, as well as consumers of TV broadcasts. > Unfortunately, i find your take on this matter elitist, completely biased > and humanly selfish. You forget that a court of law makes judgement after > weighing all interests at stake, and is ultimately guided by the letter of > law, and the public interest. The major media houses have not at all been > against digital migration. They have only been against the hurried manner > in which the process has been pushed through by the CCK, and the less than > transparent award of licenses to third parties to the contemptous exemption > of the major broadcasters and investors in the industry. Ladies and > gentlemen, from you posh houses and offices in upmarket Nairobi estates you > forget that KSh5,000 is a fortune for most Kenyan households, which cannot > be spent on a set top box while there are other most pressing basic needs. > This is a reality that even rich economies like the USA chose not to run > away from, and they issued vouchers for digital boxes for those households > that couldn't afford them. Their migration had to be postponed severally to > ensure no household was left behind. What happened even to the proposal to > scrap taxes on these boxes, which could have halved the cost? Have you, > kictanetters, in your eagerness to make a quick buck from the new digital > world, forgotten that more than half of kenyans live on less than Sh105 > ($1.25) per day, yet they also crave for and have a right to watch TV? > what the court of appeal found was a CCK bent on bulldozing a critical > process, and ruled that on a balance, it would hurt public interest more to > continue than to pause, be more consultative and carry everyone on board > like the civilised and accomodative society that Kenya is supposed to be. > Rgds, > --WG > -----Original message----- > From: Network of non- formal Educational institutions > Sent: 30/03/2014, 9:19 am > To: wgikunju(a)gmail.com > Cc: kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK > Response > > > Dear ALL > > It is very sad indeed. As a major stakeholder, I think the courts did not > balance. It looked more on the purported injustice of the major media > houses and ignored the broader goal of digital migration. > > With regards to CCK all government institutions are moving towards > complying to the constitution. And CCK will pass over the work and programs > they have been implementing to the new body once it is formed in a smooth > process that will not destroy the gains so far. What the courts have done > is destroying all gains through this. > > I have a feeling that very many Kenyans and professionals/institutions > have very little knowledge on Digital migration. The courts included. CCK > should offer a sensitization/ awareness forum on Digital migration to > judges. > > The consumers have lost because what the major media may do is to have all > the channels they would think of just as they have done on radio. The > consumer will miss diversity in content and programing. > How about young and upcoming medai houses. Will they ever have a chance in > the meddial of these major houses. Talk of monopoly by the major houses > that would always want to keep the status quo > > Jane > > > On Sunday, March 30, 2014 6:51 AM, Ali Hussein <ali(a)hussein.me.ke> wrote: > > Bernard > > Don't bet on it. Unfortunately I'm coming to a sad conclusion regarding > the judiciary. In its attempt to show how 'independent' it is we are seeing > a move towards an 'activist judiciary' which negates the very reason why we > went through such a painful reform process in the judiciary. > > All I can say now is GOD HELP KENYA. > > > > Ali Hussein > > +254 0770 906375 / 0713 601113 > > Twitter: @AliHKassim > Skype: abu-jomo > LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassimBlog: www.alyhussein.com > > > "I fear the day technology will surpass human interaction. The world will > have a generation of idiots". ~ Albert Einstein > Sent from my iPad > > On Mar 29, 2014, at 11:57 AM, "Bernard Kioko [Bernsoft Group]" < > bkioko(a)bernsoft.com> wrote: > > > David, > > You have summarized it well. > > Perhaps the benefit of what happened yesterday is that at the Supreme > Court, sanity will carry the day without the option of going to any other > court thereafter. It appeared to me like that's the "the plan" . Then > again, is this wishful thinking on my part. > > Regards > > From:kictanet [mailto:kictanet-bounces+bkioko= > bernsoft.com(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke] On Behalf Of David Makali > Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2014 11:40 AM > To: bkioko(a)bernsoft.com > Cc: kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK > Response > > The court exceeded its mandate and sowed more confusion: > > 1. By legitimizing the expectation of the media owners for a license and > proceeding to grant it one uncompetitively. So, why did the const require > vetting of judges who were in office by 2010? They had a legitimate > expectation to continue working into pensionhood, having held their > positions for years. The pt: the constitution erased all preferential > expectations and set a new standard because of grievances over legitimacy > and competence of the status quo. In the case of ICT/ broadcasting, > similar questions lie over the evenness of the ground. The "competitive" > standard in the award of any public resource or positions is to address > such issues. > > 2. By simply voiding the rights of PANG which had been issued a license > pursuant to a competitive process, however conducted by an "illegal" cck, > and disregarding the injustice and financial consequences of such a > decision. Why uphold the rights of one party and extinguish the rights of > others? The court's Sympathy only seemed to lie on one side for which it > poured out its heart generously, but totally ignored the rights of Pang and > its subscribers. A middle ground position, recognizing the predicament of > the current media investors and a suitable remedy to the injustice it found > committed against them by cck would have sufficed to put the country on a > forward footing. But this? The next Destination seems to be the Supreme > Court, which am afraid is going to be choking soon with many unnecessary > petitions, thanks to the court of appeal's contestable strokes of justice. > Pang, a subscriber, another investors, or even "cofek's" unrecognized > consumers have > more than enough ground the way I see it. > > 3. By failing to admonish the govt for its confused policy (chaotic > really) and confirming how dangerous it is to invest n this country, in ict > particularly, because it has protected investors, and others are secondary > regardless of the processes, which are now routinely reversed. > > > > This is official mail. If you doubt the content, call back on > +254722517540. > > On Mar 29, 2014, at 10:15 AM, Dennis Kioko <dmbuvi(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Very interesting Grace. > > > >Was the court well versed on the whole digital migration process, > spectrum and the fact that spectrum is a resource that belongs to all > Kenyans, and not a few organisations? > > > >On Saturday, 29 March 2014, Grace Githaiga <ggithaiga(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >@Kioko, I quoted this sentence because I just didnt believe that a court > of law can disregard the fact that there are rules to tendering processes. > Inaonekana mambo ni yale yale! > > > >"An independent body should therefore give them a licence without going > through the tender process provided they comply with the regulations," Mr > Justice Maraga said. > > > >________________________________ > > > >Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 09:26:13 +0300 > >From: dmbuvi(a)gmail.com > >Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK > Response > >CC: kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > >To: ggithaiga(a)hotmail.com > > > >The court ruling as reported in the Daily Nation article is quite > confusing. > > > >First, the court is asking the government to reimburse PANG and StarTimes > for their licensing fee and investments. How much will this cost the tax > payer? > > > >Second, the court in supporting its ruling, says media owners have > invested a lot and they shouldn't lose their investment. The media owners > will still lose their investment as digital broadcasting is a new > technology that requires new infrastructure - perhaps the only > infrastructure that can be reused is the towers. > > > >Third, is the court implying that licenses issued by CCK are > unconstitutional? > > > >On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Ali Hussein <ali(a)hussein.me.ke> wrote: > >Listers > > > >Lets step back and ask a few fundamental questions:- > > > >1. How has CAK contravened the constitution in regards to the digital > migration. > > > >2. How does this affect the country in the scheme of things in relation > to the global move to digital migration. > > > >3. How does it benefit the consumer when we continue to perpetuate a > status quo in the media space where a few big boys muscle out everyone? > Maybe Consumer Federation can expound on this. > > > >4. How can we ensure going forward that the tendering processes are > air-tight and can withstand frivolous suits. In light of what happened to > the laptop tender we must ask a fundamental question: > > > >IS THIS GOVERNMENT SETTING ITSELF UP TO FAIL IN THE OCT SECTOR? > > > >Ali Hussein > > > >+254 0770 906375 / 0713 601113 > > > >Twitter: @AliHKassim > >Skype: abu-jomo > >LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim > >Blog: www.alyhussein.com > > > >"I fear the day technology will surpass human interaction. The world will > have a generation of idiots". ~ Albert Einstein > > > >Sent from my iPad > > > >On Mar 29, 2014, at 1:53 AM, Grace Githaiga <ggithaiga(a)hotmail.com> > wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> > http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Victory-for-Kenyans-as-judges-halt-rush-to-dig… > >>"An independent body should therefore give them a licence without going > through the tender process provided they comply with the regulations," Mr > Justice Maraga said. > >> > >>Really? How now? > >> > >>________________________________ > >> > >>From: jgmbugua(a)gmail.com > >>Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 23:36:37 +0300 > >>Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK > Response > >>CC: kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > >>To: ggithaiga(a)hotmail.com > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>Idiocy of the highest order. There is no win here only delay of the > inevitable and stifling of innovation and investment. > >> > >>Multichoice is certainly a winner. > >> > >> > >> > >>________________________________ > >> > >> > >>From: Consumers Federation of Kenya (COFEK)< > >_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list > kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Unsubscribe or > change your options at > https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/ggithaiga%40hotmail.c… Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for > people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and > regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT > sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and > development. KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable > behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and > bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect > privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications. > > > > > >-- > >with Regards: > > > >blog.denniskioko.com > > > > > _______________________________________________ > >kictanet mailing list > >kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > >https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet > > > >Unsubscribe or change your options at > https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/dmakali%40yahoo.com > > > >The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform > for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and > regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT > sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. > > > >KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors > online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, > share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do > not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications. > > > ________________________________ > > > > This e-mail and > any attachments may contain information that is confidential, legally > privileged and protected by law and is intended for the sole use of the > named > recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, or disclosure or distribution > is > prohibited. Any liability (in negligence or otherwise) arising from any > third > party acting, or refraining from acting on any information contained in > this > email is hereby excluded. If you are not the intended recipient, please > delete > the contents and notify the sender immediately; do not disclose the > contents to > any other person, use it for any purpose or store or copy the information > in > any medium. Whilst our e-mails are checked for viruses, we cannot guarantee > that this message or any attachment is virus free, does not contain > malicious > code or is incompatible with your electronic system and the Company does > not > accept liability in respect of viruses, malicious code or any related > problems > that you might experience. For further information about us, please > contact us > at the address indicated below. > > Bernsoft Interactive Limited - P O Box 15177-00100 Nairobi - Tel: +254 > 722 929192 Email: admin(a)bernsoft.com Web: www.bernsoft.com > _______________________________________________ > >kictanet mailing list > >kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > >https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet > > > >Unsubscribe or change your options at > https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/info%40alyhussein.com > > > >The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform > for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and > regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT > sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. > > > >KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors > online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, > share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do > not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications. > > _______________________________________________ > kictanet mailing list > kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet > > Unsubscribe or change your options at > https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/nnfeischools%40yahoo.… > > The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform > for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and > regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT > sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. > > KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors > online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, > share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do > not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications. > > _______________________________________________ > kictanet mailing list > kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet > > Unsubscribe or change your options at > https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/conradakunga%40gmail.… > > The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform > for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and > regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT > sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. > > KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors > online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, > share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do > not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications. >

1 0

Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK
by Gideon 30 Mar '14

30 Mar '14

+1 Harry, My thoughts on this matter have been that the earlier we migrate the better for everybody, that then we shall be able to learn from the challenges that come from the digital switch, am not sure exactly the reasons behind the continued postponement given that the global deadline for the switch is very close. Gideon Rop DotConnectAfrica. Like many in the list, I appear lost on what the federation considers to be > a "win" for consumers. I haven't got a chance to read the ruling as > delivered by the court and therefore using the snippets you provided in > your post as context. > > As a consumer in my own right, I feel this ruling has robbed me the right > to consume content how I want it, when I want it and where I want it read > Choice. As an industry player, the ruling is to say the least misguided, > unconstitutional and out of touch with industry trends and international > obligations. > > So can you be kind enough to explain to us how the consumer has won in > this case. Or did you confuse the consumer with COFEK and/or together with > its partners the media owners? At this point I am completely confused who > COFEK actually represents. > > With Kind Regards > Harry > > > On Mar 28, 2014, at 6:47 PM, "Consumers Federation of Kenya $COFEK$" < > hotline(a)cofek.co.ke> wrote: > > > > Dear All, > > > > This afternoon's ruling by the Court of Appeal is certainly a major win > for the consumers, operators and other stakeholders on the broadcast media. > Indeed the consumer movement is emboldened and we hope other sectors shall > take their lesson. > > > > It vindicates our long held view that in its' current form, the CCK (and > now CAK) is not the regulator envisaged under Article 34(3) of the > Constitution. We are grateful that the Media Owners Association have pushed > and won the fight we began in December 2012 to make the transition to > digital broadcasting fair and independent to all stakeholders. > > > > We expect that the nullified Broadcast Signal Distribution license to > PANG will have immediate consequences on Star Times and that the BSD to > media owners will be fast-tracked. It will be futile for the Government to > appeal the ruling at the Supreme Court. > > > > In light of such embarrassment to Government, it is only fair that the > ICT Secretary resigns from office and that the regulator rescinds all major > decisions it has made as the effect of the ruling has the potential to > reverse all decisions made by the CCK since August 27, 2010 when the > current Constitution was promulgated. Thank you. > > > > Japheth Ogutu, FOR: Secretary General, The Consumers Federation of Kenya > (Cofek) > > > > _______________________________________________ > > kictanet mailing list > > kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > > https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet > > > > Unsubscribe or change your options at > https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/harry%40africanedevel… > > > > The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform > for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and > regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT > sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. > > > > KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors > online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, > share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do > not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications. >

1 0

Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response
by Consumers Federation of Kenya (COFEK) 29 Mar '14

29 Mar '14

Dear All, This afternoon's ruling by the Court of Appeal is certainly a major win for the consumers, operators and other stakeholders on the broadcast media. Indeed the consumer movement is emboldened and we hope other sectors shall take their lesson. It vindicates our long held view that in its' current form, the CCK (and now CAK) is not the regulator envisaged under Article 34(3) of the Constitution. We are grateful that the Media Owners Association have pushed and won the fight we began in December 2012 to make the transition to digital broadcasting fair and independent to all stakeholders. We expect that the nullified Broadcast Signal Distribution license to PANG will have immediate consequences on Star Times and that the BSD to media owners will be fast-tracked. It will be futile for the Government to appeal the ruling at the Supreme Court. In light of such embarrassment to Government, it is only fair that the ICT Secretary resigns from office and that the regulator rescinds all major decisions it has made as the effect of the ruling has the potential to reverse all decisions made by the CCK since August 27, 2010 when the current Constitution was promulgated. Thank you. Japheth Ogutu, FOR: Secretary General, The Consumers Federation of Kenya (Cofek)

8 8