Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response
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. -----Original Message----- From: "Consumers Federation of Kenya (COFEK)" <hotline@cofek.co.ke> Sent: 3/28/2014 6:48 PM To: "jgmbugua@gmail.com" <jgmbugua@gmail.com> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Subject: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response 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)
As I said.... Justice of the Big fish... Tuna and above... Sent from my iPad
On Mar 28, 2014, at 11:36 PM, James Mbugua <jgmbugua@gmail.com> wrote:
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) Sent: 3/28/2014 6:48 PM To: jgmbugua@gmail.com Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions Subject: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response
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@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/arebacollins%40gmail.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.
http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Victory-for-Kenyans-as-judges-halt-rush-to-digital-migration/-/1056/2261326/-/qc6k17z/-/index.html“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@gmail.com Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 23:36:37 +0300 Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response CC: kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke To: ggithaiga@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) Sent: 3/28/2014 6:48 PM To: jgmbugua@gmail.com Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions Subject: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response 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@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.co... 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.
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@hotmail.com> wrote:
http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Victory-for-Kenyans-as-judges-halt-rush-to-digi... “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@gmail.com Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 23:36:37 +0300 Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response CC: kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke To: ggithaiga@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) Sent: 3/28/2014 6:48 PM To: jgmbugua@gmail.com Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions Subject: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response
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@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.co... 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@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.
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@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<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@hotmail.com> wrote: http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Victory-for-Kenyans-as-judges-halt-rush-to-digi... "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@gmail.com Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 23:36:37 +0300 Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response CC: kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke To: ggithaiga@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) Sent: 3/28/2014 6:48 PM To: jgmbugua@gmail.com Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions Subject: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response 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@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.com> _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','kictanet@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. -- Sent from MetroMail
@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@gmail.com Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response CC: kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke To: ggithaiga@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@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-jomoLinkedIn: 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@hotmail.com> wrote: http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Victory-for-Kenyans-as-judges-halt-rush-to-digi... “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@gmail.com Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 23:36:37 +0300 Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response CC: kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke To: ggithaiga@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) Sent: 3/28/2014 6:48 PM To: jgmbugua@gmail.com Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions Subject: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response 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@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Unsubscribe or change your options at _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@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. -- Sent from MetroMail _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@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.co... 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.
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@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@gmail.com <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','dmbuvi@gmail.com');> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response CC: kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke To: ggithaiga@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@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<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@hotmail.com> wrote:
http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Victory-for-Kenyans-as-judges-halt-rush-to-digi... "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@gmail.com Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 23:36:37 +0300 Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response CC: kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke To: ggithaiga@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@lists.kictanet.or.ke<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','kictanet@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.co... 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/>
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@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@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@gmail.com Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response CC: kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke To: ggithaiga@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@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@hotmail.com> wrote:
http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Victory-for-Kenyans-as-judges-halt-rush-to-digi... “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@gmail.com Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 23:36:37 +0300 Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response CC: kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke To: ggithaiga@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@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.co... 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@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.
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@bernsoft.com Cc: kictanet@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@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@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@gmail.com <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','dmbuvi@gmail.com');> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response CC: kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke To: ggithaiga@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@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 <http://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@hotmail.com> wrote: http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Victory-for-Kenyans-as-judges-halt-rush-to-digi... “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@gmail.com Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 23:36:37 +0300 Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response CC: kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke To: ggithaiga@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@lists.kictanet.or.ke <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','kictanet@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.co... 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 <http://www.denniskioko.com/> _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@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@bernsoft.com Web: www.bernsoft.com
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/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 11:57 AM, "Bernard Kioko [Bernsoft Group]" <bkioko@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@bernsoft.com Cc: kictanet@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@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@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@gmail.com Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response CC: kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke To: ggithaiga@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@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@hotmail.com> wrote:
http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Victory-for-Kenyans-as-judges-halt-rush-to-digi... “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@gmail.com Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 23:36:37 +0300 Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response CC: kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke To: ggithaiga@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@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.co... 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@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@bernsoft.com Web: www.bernsoft.com
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@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.
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@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@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@bernsoft.com Cc: kictanet@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@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@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@gmail.com Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response CC: kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke To: ggithaiga@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@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@hotmail.com> wrote:
http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Victory-for-Kenyans-as-judges-halt-rush-to-digi... “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@gmail.com Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 23:36:37 +0300 Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response CC: kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke To: ggithaiga@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@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.co... 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@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@bernsoft.com Web: www.bernsoft.com _______________________________________________
kictanet mailing list kictanet@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@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.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.
Dear All, We appreciate and respect all opinions especially divergent ones from our own. Here below, please find our official position on the matter: http://www.cofek.co.ke/index.php/14-news/414-why-digital-migration-appeal-co... http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000108163 <http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000108163&story_title=why-digital-ruling-offered-justice-to-consumers&pageNo=1> &story_title=why-digital-ruling-offered-justice-to-consumers&pageNo=1 Yours faithfully, Japheth Ogutu FOR: Secretary General www.cofek.co.ke
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@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@bernsoft.com *Cc:* kictanet@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@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@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@gmail.com Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response CC: kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke To: ggithaiga@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@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@hotmail.com> wrote:
http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Victory-for-Kenyans-as-judges-halt-rush-to-digi...
"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@gmail.com Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 23:36:37 +0300 Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response CC: kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke To: ggithaiga@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@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.co... 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@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@bernsoft.com Web: www.bernsoft.com
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@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
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@madeinkenya.org> Date: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 Subject: [kictanet] Kenya: The Media is Not Innocent To: wainaina.mungai@gmail.com Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <kictanet@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@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@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@madeinkenya.org Unsubscribe or change your options at
http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/wainaina%40madeinkenya....
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
-- On Sunday, March 30, 2014, Ngigi Waithaka <ngigi@at.co.ke> wrote: 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
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@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@bernsoft.com Cc: kictanet@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
2. By simply voiding the rights of PANG which had been issued a license
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
of the way 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. 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. 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_T...
Wainana I feel like you are trying to sway us away from the real issue...what happened at the courts! Is there any specific reason u r attempting to close that particular debate and saying ppl here have little objectivity? On 31 Mar 2014 09:23, "Wyne Bar" <wainaina.mungai@gmail.com> wrote:
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@madeinkenya.org> Date: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 Subject: [kictanet] Kenya: The Media is Not Innocent To: wainaina.mungai@gmail.com Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <kictanet@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@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@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@madeinkenya.org Unsubscribe or change your options at
http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/wainaina%40madeinkenya....
--
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
On Sunday, March 30, 2014, Ngigi Waithaka <ngigi@at.co.ke> wrote: 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
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@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@bernsoft.com Cc: kictanet@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
2. By simply voiding the rights of PANG which had been issued a license
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
of the way 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. 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. 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_T...
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@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/bkioko%40bernsoft.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@bernsoft.com Web: www.bernsoft.com
Bernard, Feel free to comment...I have no censorship powers. Simply put, let us also discuss the important issue of the REGULATOR as it is the composition of the regulator that seemed to have brought a "twist"to the whole case. It is also where the solution seems to lie as I am privy to the fact that CCK/CAK officials do themselves prefer a law that "strengthens them". On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Bernard Kioko <bkioko@bernsoft.com> wrote:
Wainana I feel like you are trying to sway us away from the real issue...what happened at the courts! Is there any specific reason u r attempting to close that particular debate and saying ppl here have little objectivity? On 31 Mar 2014 09:23, "Wyne Bar" <wainaina.mungai@gmail.com> wrote:
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@madeinkenya.org> Date: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 Subject: [kictanet] Kenya: The Media is Not Innocent To: wainaina.mungai@gmail.com Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <kictanet@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@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@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@madeinkenya.org Unsubscribe or change your options at
http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/wainaina%40madeinkenya....
--
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
On Sunday, March 30, 2014, Ngigi Waithaka <ngigi@at.co.ke> wrote: 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
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@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@bernsoft.com Cc: kictanet@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
2. By simply voiding the rights of PANG which had been issued a
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
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
of the way 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. 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. particularly, because it has protected investors, and others are secondary regardless of the processes, which are now routinely reversed. 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_T...
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@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/bkioko%40bernsoft.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@bernsoft.com Web: www.bernsoft.com
Ok. I understand. One question, Did the appellant challenge the legality/composition of CCK/CAK? I didn't get a chance to find that out. Regards From: Wainaina Mungai [mailto:wainaina.mungai@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 12:32 PM To: Bernard Kioko Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response Bernard, Feel free to comment...I have no censorship powers. Simply put, let us also discuss the important issue of the REGULATOR as it is the composition of the regulator that seemed to have brought a "twist"to the whole case. It is also where the solution seems to lie as I am privy to the fact that CCK/CAK officials do themselves prefer a law that "strengthens them". On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Bernard Kioko <bkioko@bernsoft.com> wrote: Wainana I feel like you are trying to sway us away from the real issue...what happened at the courts! Is there any specific reason u r attempting to close that particular debate and saying ppl here have little objectivity? On 31 Mar 2014 09:23, "Wyne Bar" <wainaina.mungai@gmail.com> wrote: 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@madeinkenya.org> Date: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 Subject: [kictanet] Kenya: The Media is Not Innocent To: wainaina.mungai@gmail.com Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <kictanet@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@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@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@madeinkenya.org Unsubscribe or change your options at
http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/wainaina%40madeinkenya. org
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
-- On Sunday, March 30, 2014, Ngigi Waithaka <ngigi@at.co.ke> wrote: 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
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@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
<mailto:kictanet-bounces%2Bbkioko> =bernsoft.com@lists.kictanet.or.ke] On Behalf Of David Makali
Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2014 11:40 AM To: bkioko@bernsoft.com Cc: kictanet@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
2. By simply voiding the rights of PANG which had been issued a license
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
the way 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. 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. 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 <tel:%2B%20254%C2%A0%280%29%2020%202333%20471> (0) 20 2333 471 |Office Mobile: +254 786 28 28 28 <tel:%2B254%20786%2028%2028%2028> | M + 254 737 811 000 <tel:%2B%20254%20737%20811%20000> www.at.co.ke
<https://ci5.googleusercontent.com/proxy/Klzt0M0J4ArCmV6P9nQpTWHWBBTkFaGwX5_ TYTTSlWa5Ga2DBgB_Z69_EvDeUzq4znZ7ldb5eLarA_LRXYemEgRIj1AV0g=s0-d-e1-ft#http: //academia.a1.io/images/a1io_footerlogo.png>
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@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/bkioko%40bernsoft.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. _____ <http://bernsoft.com/img/logo.jpg> 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 <tel:%2B254%20722%20929192> Email: admin@bernsoft.com Web: www.bernsoft.com -- * ------------------------------ * 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@bernsoft.com Web: www.bernsoft.com
Ok. I understand.
One question, Did the appellant challenge the legality/composition of CCK/CAK? I didn't get a chance to find that out.
Regards
From: Wainaina Mungai [mailto:wainaina.mungai@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 12:32 PM To: Bernard Kioko Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response
Bernard,
Feel free to comment...I have no censorship powers. Simply put, let us also discuss the important issue of the REGULATOR as it is the composition of the regulator that seemed to have brought a "twist"to the whole case. It is also where the solution seems to lie as I am privy to the fact that CCK/CAK officials do themselves prefer a law that "strengthens them".
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Bernard Kioko <bkioko@bernsoft.com> wrote:
Wainana I feel like you are trying to sway us away from the real issue...what happened at the courts! Is there any specific reason u r attempting to close that particular debate and saying ppl here have little objectivity?
On 31 Mar 2014 09:23, "Wyne Bar" <wainaina.mungai@gmail.com> wrote:
I have kept off this debate because of vested interests by several
We can make a judgement on CCK/CAK using Section 34 below;.....and decide what sort of Regulator we really want, moving forward... (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 Monday, March 31, 2014, Bernard Kioko [Bernsoft Group] < bkioko@bernsoft.com> wrote: 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@madeinkenya.org> Date: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 Subject: [kictanet] Kenya: The Media is Not Innocent To: wainaina.mungai@gmail.com Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <kictanet@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 achie
________________________________
<
https://ci5.googleusercontent.com/proxy/_V1fVUBJF4xt9P678-JpdqM0DjKn7nQ5j0bx...
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@bernsoft.com Web: www.bernsoft.com
Meanwhile, why has COFEK not rushed to court on the issues affecting the matatu industry. If this was truly about consumers, don't more consumers use matatus than TVs? After all, I saw someone claiming that we are being middle class in our reasoning that digital migration should go on without making it affordable for the poor? Isn't the digital migration of matatus hurting the poor too, Mr. Mutoro? On Monday, 31 March 2014, Wainaina Mungai <wainaina.mungai@gmail.com> wrote:
We can make a judgement on CCK/CAK using Section 34 below;.....and decide what sort of Regulator we really want, moving forward...
(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
Ok. I understand.
One question, Did the appellant challenge the legality/composition of CCK/CAK? I didn't get a chance to find that out.
Regards
From: Wainaina Mungai [mailto:wainaina.mungai@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 12:32 PM To: Bernard Kioko Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response
Bernard,
Feel free to comment...I have no censorship powers. Simply put, let us also discuss the important issue of the REGULATOR as it is the composition of the regulator that seemed to have brought a "twist"to the whole case. It is also where the solution seems to lie as I am privy to the fact that CCK/CAK officials do themselves prefer a law that "strengthens them".
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Bernard Kioko <bkioko@bernsoft.com> wrote:
Wainana I feel like you are trying to sway us away from the real issue...what happened at the courts! Is there any specific reason u r attempting to close that particular debate and saying ppl here have little objectivity?
On 31 Mar 2014 09:23, "Wyne Bar" <wainaina.mungai@gmail.com> wrote:
I have kept off this debate because of vested interests by several
On Monday, March 31, 2014, Bernard Kioko [Bernsoft Group] < bkioko@bernsoft.com> wrote: 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@madeinkenya.org> Date: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 Subject: [kictanet] Kenya: The Media is Not Innocent To: wainaina.mungai@gmail.com Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <> ________________________________
<
https://ci5.googleusercontent.com/proxy/_V1fVUBJF4xt9P678-JpdqM0DjKn7nQ5j0bx...
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@bernsoft.com<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','admin@bernsoft.com');>Web: www.bernsoft.com
-- with Regards: blog.denniskioko.com <http://www.denniskioko.com/>
Ok. I understand.
One question, Did the appellant challenge the legality/composition of CCK/CAK? I didnt get a chance to find that out.
Regards
From: Wainaina Mungai [mailto:wainaina.mungai@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 12:32 PM To: Bernard Kioko Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response
Bernard,
Feel free to comment...I have no censorship powers. Simply put, let us also discuss the important issue of the REGULATOR as it is the composition of the regulator that seemed to have brought a "twist"to the whole case. It is also where the solution seems to lie as I am privy to the fact that CCK/CAK officials do themselves prefer a law that "strengthens them".
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Bernard Kioko <bkioko@bernsoft.com> wrote:
Wainana I feel like you are trying to sway us away from the real issue...what happened at the courts! Is there any specific reason u r attempting to close that particular debate and saying ppl here have little objectivity?
On 31 Mar 2014 09:23, "Wyne Bar" <wainaina.mungai@gmail.com> wrote:
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
Dear Mr Kioko, I am directed by the Cofek Secretary General to respond to you as follows; First, to thank you most sincerely for pointing COFEK in this direction. Second, to inform you that we have been working with our partners which partners are already in Court over the matter. We are also following up on the potential abuse of and on quality and windfall for speed governors importers. We could not have updated you on this list as our understanding is that it is restricted to ICT issues. If you need to be subscribed to all Cofek updates, please make a request to: hotline@cofek.co.ke Third, and on ICT, Justice David Majanja is expected to give directions on the Cofek petition no. 144 of 2014 against irregular appointment of ICTA CEO contrary to the stipulated process. We will update later. We thank you and other listers for keeping us on our toes. Thank you. Japheth Ogutu FOR: SECRETARY GENERAL www.cofek.co.ke From: kictanet [mailto:kictanet-bounces+hotline=cofek.co.ke@lists.kictanet.or.ke] On Behalf Of Dennis Kioko Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2014 2:15 PM To: The Consumers Federation of Kenya (Cofek) Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response Meanwhile, why has COFEK not rushed to court on the issues affecting the matatu industry. If this was truly about consumers, don't more consumers use matatus than TVs? After all, I saw someone claiming that we are being middle class in our reasoning that digital migration should go on without making it affordable for the poor? Isn't the digital migration of matatus hurting the poor too, Mr. Mutoro? On Monday, 31 March 2014, Wainaina Mungai <wainaina.mungai@gmail.com> wrote: We can make a judgement on CCK/CAK using Section 34 below;.....and decide what sort of Regulator we really want, moving forward... (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 Monday, March 31, 2014, Bernard Kioko [Bernsoft Group] <bkioko@bernsoft.com> wrote: 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@madeinkenya.org> Date: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 Subject: [kictanet] Kenya: The Media is Not Innocent To: wainaina.mungai@gmail.com Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <> ________________________________
<https://ci5.googleusercontent.com/proxy/_V1fVUBJF4xt9P678-JpdqM0DjKn7nQ5j0b xeRW8a2DWnVdtH9hd1PaCatcDUpn2FquTpsfH=s0-d-e1-ft#http://bernsoft.com/img/log o.jpg>
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@bernsoft.com <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','admin@bernsoft.com');> Web: www.bernsoft.com -- with Regards: blog.denniskioko.com <http://www.denniskioko.com/>
Speed Governers in matatus and fleet management systems.....that is ICT. Pls ask your Secretary General for another response that's appropriate. Now that we know its ICT related what is the update you didn't share with us? On 2 Apr 2014 15:11, "Consumers Federation of Kenya (COFEK)" < hotline@cofek.co.ke> wrote:
Dear Mr Kioko,
I am directed by the Cofek Secretary General to respond to you as follows;
First, to thank you most sincerely for pointing COFEK in this direction. Second, to inform you that we have been working with our partners which partners are already in Court over the matter. We are also following up on the potential abuse of and on quality and windfall for speed governors importers. We could not have updated you on this list as our understanding is that it is restricted to ICT issues. If you need to be subscribed to all Cofek updates, please make a request to: hotline@cofek.co.ke
Third, and on ICT, Justice David Majanja is expected to give directions on the Cofek petition no. 144 of 2014 against irregular appointment of ICTA CEO contrary to the stipulated process. We will update later.
We thank you and other listers for keeping us on our toes. Thank you.
Japheth Ogutu
*FOR: SECRETARY GENERAL*
*www.cofek.co.ke <http://www.cofek.co.ke> *
*From:* kictanet [mailto:kictanet-bounces+hotline= cofek.co.ke@lists.kictanet.or.ke] *On Behalf Of *Dennis Kioko *Sent:* Wednesday, April 02, 2014 2:15 PM *To:* The Consumers Federation of Kenya (Cofek) *Cc:* KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions *Subject:* Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response
Meanwhile, why has COFEK not rushed to court on the issues affecting the matatu industry.
If this was truly about consumers, don't more consumers use matatus than TVs? After all, I saw someone claiming that we are being middle class in our reasoning that digital migration should go on without making it affordable for the poor?
Isn't the digital migration of matatus hurting the poor too, Mr. Mutoro?
On Monday, 31 March 2014, Wainaina Mungai <wainaina.mungai@gmail.com> wrote:
We can make a judgement on CCK/CAK using Section 34 below;.....and decide what sort of Regulator we really want, moving forward...
(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
Ok. I understand.
One question, Did the appellant challenge the legality/composition of CCK/CAK? I didn't get a chance to find that out.
Regards
From: Wainaina Mungai [mailto:wainaina.mungai@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 12:32 PM To: Bernard Kioko Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response
Bernard,
Feel free to comment...I have no censorship powers. Simply put, let us also discuss the important issue of the REGULATOR as it is the composition of the regulator that seemed to have brought a "twist"to the whole case. It is also where the solution seems to lie as I am privy to the fact that CCK/CAK officials do themselves prefer a law that "strengthens them".
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Bernard Kioko <bkioko@bernsoft.com> wrote:
Wainana I feel like you are trying to sway us away from the real issue...what happened at the courts! Is there any specific reason u r attempting to close that particular debate and saying ppl here have little objectivity?
On 31 Mar 2014 09:23, "Wyne Bar" <wainaina.mungai@gmail.com> wrote:
I have kept off this debate because of vested interests by several
On Monday, March 31, 2014, Bernard Kioko [Bernsoft Group] < bkioko@bernsoft.com> wrote: 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@madeinkenya.org> Date: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 Subject: [kictanet] Kenya: The Media is Not Innocent To: wainaina.mungai@gmail.com Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <> ________________________________
<
https://ci5.googleusercontent.com/proxy/_V1fVUBJF4xt9P678-JpdqM0DjKn7nQ5j0bx...
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@bernsoft.com Web: www.bernsoft.com
-- with Regards:
blog.denniskioko.com <http://www.denniskioko.com/>
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@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/bkioko%40bernsoft.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@bernsoft.com Web: www.bernsoft.com
Its rather amusing that Cofek fight tooth and nail against the digital migration whose household cost is about Ksh 5,000 one off as opposed to lobbying or pursuing the VAT act and other macro economic policies that the government is pursuing that hurts the poor households for an infinite amount of time. In my opinion, anyone who can afford a TV can afford a set-top box. My bigger disappointment is with the Judiciary that likes postponing things indefinitely. Will the cost of Set top boxes come down before September? On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 4:46 PM, Bernard Kioko <bkioko@bernsoft.com> wrote:
Speed Governers in matatus and fleet management systems.....that is ICT. Pls ask your Secretary General for another response that's appropriate.
Now that we know its ICT related what is the update you didn't share with us? On 2 Apr 2014 15:11, "Consumers Federation of Kenya (COFEK)" < hotline@cofek.co.ke> wrote:
Dear Mr Kioko,
I am directed by the Cofek Secretary General to respond to you as follows;
First, to thank you most sincerely for pointing COFEK in this direction. Second, to inform you that we have been working with our partners which partners are already in Court over the matter. We are also following up on the potential abuse of and on quality and windfall for speed governors importers. We could not have updated you on this list as our understanding is that it is restricted to ICT issues. If you need to be subscribed to all Cofek updates, please make a request to: hotline@cofek.co.ke
Third, and on ICT, Justice David Majanja is expected to give directions on the Cofek petition no. 144 of 2014 against irregular appointment of ICTA CEO contrary to the stipulated process. We will update later.
We thank you and other listers for keeping us on our toes. Thank you.
Japheth Ogutu
*FOR: SECRETARY GENERAL*
*www.cofek.co.ke <http://www.cofek.co.ke> *
*From:* kictanet [mailto:kictanet-bounces+hotline= cofek.co.ke@lists.kictanet.or.ke] *On Behalf Of *Dennis Kioko *Sent:* Wednesday, April 02, 2014 2:15 PM *To:* The Consumers Federation of Kenya (Cofek) *Cc:* KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions *Subject:* Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response
Meanwhile, why has COFEK not rushed to court on the issues affecting the matatu industry.
If this was truly about consumers, don't more consumers use matatus than TVs? After all, I saw someone claiming that we are being middle class in our reasoning that digital migration should go on without making it affordable for the poor?
Isn't the digital migration of matatus hurting the poor too, Mr. Mutoro?
On Monday, 31 March 2014, Wainaina Mungai <wainaina.mungai@gmail.com> wrote:
We can make a judgement on CCK/CAK using Section 34 below;.....and decide what sort of Regulator we really want, moving forward...
(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
Ok. I understand.
One question, Did the appellant challenge the legality/composition of CCK/CAK? I didn't get a chance to find that out.
Regards
From: Wainaina Mungai [mailto:wainaina.mungai@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 12:32 PM To: Bernard Kioko Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response
Bernard,
Feel free to comment...I have no censorship powers. Simply put, let us also discuss the important issue of the REGULATOR as it is the composition of the regulator that seemed to have brought a "twist"to the whole case. It is also where the solution seems to lie as I am privy to the fact that CCK/CAK officials do themselves prefer a law that "strengthens them".
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Bernard Kioko <bkioko@bernsoft.com> wrote:
Wainana I feel like you are trying to sway us away from the real issue...what happened at the courts! Is there any specific reason u r attempting to close that particular debate and saying ppl here have little objectivity?
On 31 Mar 2014 09:23, "Wyne Bar" <wainaina.mungai@gmail.com> wrote:
I have kept off this debate because of vested interests by several
On Monday, March 31, 2014, Bernard Kioko [Bernsoft Group] < bkioko@bernsoft.com> wrote: 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@madeinkenya.org> Date: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 Subject: [kictanet] Kenya: The Media is Not Innocent To: wainaina.mungai@gmail.com Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <> ________________________________
<
https://ci5.googleusercontent.com/proxy/_V1fVUBJF4xt9P678-JpdqM0DjKn7nQ5j0bx...
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@bernsoft.com Web: www.bernsoft.com
-- with Regards:
blog.denniskioko.com <http://www.denniskioko.com/>
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@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/bkioko%40bernsoft.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@bernsoft.com Web: www.bernsoft.com
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@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/mwangy%40gmail.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.
-- Regards, Mark Mwangi markmwangi.me.ke
Japheth Could you kindly share the text of the Court of Appeal decision once you have it. It would be important in understanding how the CoA arrived at the decision. Thanks. Victor On 2 Apr 2014 15:12, "Consumers Federation of Kenya (COFEK)" < hotline@cofek.co.ke> wrote:
Dear Mr Kioko,
I am directed by the Cofek Secretary General to respond to you as follows;
First, to thank you most sincerely for pointing COFEK in this direction. Second, to inform you that we have been working with our partners which partners are already in Court over the matter. We are also following up on the potential abuse of and on quality and windfall for speed governors importers. We could not have updated you on this list as our understanding is that it is restricted to ICT issues. If you need to be subscribed to all Cofek updates, please make a request to: hotline@cofek.co.ke
Third, and on ICT, Justice David Majanja is expected to give directions on the Cofek petition no. 144 of 2014 against irregular appointment of ICTA CEO contrary to the stipulated process. We will update later.
We thank you and other listers for keeping us on our toes. Thank you.
Japheth Ogutu
*FOR: SECRETARY GENERAL*
*www.cofek.co.ke <http://www.cofek.co.ke> *
*From:* kictanet [mailto:kictanet-bounces+hotline= cofek.co.ke@lists.kictanet.or.ke] *On Behalf Of *Dennis Kioko *Sent:* Wednesday, April 02, 2014 2:15 PM *To:* The Consumers Federation of Kenya (Cofek) *Cc:* KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions *Subject:* Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response
Meanwhile, why has COFEK not rushed to court on the issues affecting the matatu industry.
If this was truly about consumers, don't more consumers use matatus than TVs? After all, I saw someone claiming that we are being middle class in our reasoning that digital migration should go on without making it affordable for the poor?
Isn't the digital migration of matatus hurting the poor too, Mr. Mutoro?
On Monday, 31 March 2014, Wainaina Mungai <wainaina.mungai@gmail.com> wrote:
We can make a judgement on CCK/CAK using Section 34 below;.....and decide what sort of Regulator we really want, moving forward...
(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
Ok. I understand.
One question, Did the appellant challenge the legality/composition of CCK/CAK? I didn't get a chance to find that out.
Regards
From: Wainaina Mungai [mailto:wainaina.mungai@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 12:32 PM To: Bernard Kioko Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response
Bernard,
Feel free to comment...I have no censorship powers. Simply put, let us also discuss the important issue of the REGULATOR as it is the composition of the regulator that seemed to have brought a "twist"to the whole case. It is also where the solution seems to lie as I am privy to the fact that CCK/CAK officials do themselves prefer a law that "strengthens them".
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Bernard Kioko <bkioko@bernsoft.com> wrote:
Wainana I feel like you are trying to sway us away from the real issue...what happened at the courts! Is there any specific reason u r attempting to close that particular debate and saying ppl here have little objectivity?
On 31 Mar 2014 09:23, "Wyne Bar" <wainaina.mungai@gmail.com> wrote:
I have kept off this debate because of vested interests by several
On Monday, March 31, 2014, Bernard Kioko [Bernsoft Group] < bkioko@bernsoft.com> wrote: 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@madeinkenya.org> Date: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 Subject: [kictanet] Kenya: The Media is Not Innocent To: wainaina.mungai@gmail.com Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <> ________________________________
<
https://ci5.googleusercontent.com/proxy/_V1fVUBJF4xt9P678-JpdqM0DjKn7nQ5j0bx...
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@bernsoft.com Web: www.bernsoft.com
-- with Regards:
blog.denniskioko.com <http://www.denniskioko.com/>
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@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/vkapiyo%40gmail.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.
@Grace, it is quite clear that the Court is ill equipped to deal with any Complex ICT issues, the questions that Ali was asking is what the Judges needed to consider, and quite obviously did not... perhaps we need to lobby for a Special Court for all matters ICT. On Saturday, March 29, 2014 9:49 AM, Grace Githaiga <ggithaiga@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@gmail.com Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response CC: kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke To: ggithaiga@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@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/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 1:53 AM, Grace Githaiga <ggithaiga@hotmail.com> wrote:
http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Victory-for-Kenyans-as-judges-halt-rush-to-digi... “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@gmail.com Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 23:36:37 +0300 Subject: Re: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response CC: kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke To: ggithaiga@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) Sent: 3/28/2014 6:48 PM To: jgmbugua@gmail.com Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions Subject: [kictanet] Digital Migration Appeal Court Ruling: COFEK Response
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@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at
_______________________________________________
kictanet mailing list kictanet@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.
-- Sent from MetroMail _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@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.co... 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@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/lkimani%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.
participants (16)
-
Ali Hussein -
Bernard Kioko -
Bernard Kioko [Bernsoft Group]
-
Collins Areba -
Consumers Federation of Kenya (COFEK) -
David Makali -
Dennis Kioko -
Grace Githaiga -
James Mbugua -
Lucy Kimani -
Mark Mwangi -
Network of non- formal Educational institutions -
Ngigi Waithaka -
Victor Kapiyo -
Wainaina Mungai -
Wyne Bar