CAN ITU REFORM? LET'S TALK ABOUT IT!

A new framework for ITU

At the beginning of the 1990s, less than20 per cent of the 189 Member States of the International Telecommunication Union had private companies operating telecommunication services in their countries. In the year 2000, there was, in a majority of those same countries, at least one private company operating in the industry. This is just one of the indications of the profound changes that have taken place in the telecommunications industry in the last decade. In the not-too-distant past when it took months, and even years, for technologies to flow from one country to another, there was no reason to criticize, or for that matter comment on, ITU's organizational structure and procedures. At that time, many nations had erected barriers to the purchase of technologies and a majority of developing countries had neither the capital nor the technical resources necessary to assimilate the technological advances. Nevertheless, from today's perspective, the eight years that separate us from the last important reform of the Union seem like they have lasted a century.

*Agência Nacional de Telecomunicações (ANATEL).

I agree with those who argue that there is an urgent need to establish a new framework for ITU. In addition to the extremely positive process of market opening in those countries where the State has historically exercised a monopoly over telecommunications, the industry — by which we mean operators, equipment manufacturers, and related sectors — has been shaken to its core by competition. The introduction of competition has produced a new set of circumstances, sometimes surprising and, until recently, unimaginable.

Moreover, in those same countries a clear trend, marked by the transfer of regulatory licensing, and surveillance duties to independent regulatory agencies, has taken shape. This is the case in Brazil, where the restructuring of the telecommunications sector in an environment driven by new technologies required the creation of an agile, dynamic, and transparent institution capable not only of fitting in structurally with the new times, but also of laying the groundwork for preparing the country to receive, assimilate and implement technological advances. The results to date have been impressive.

There is yet another significant point that should be borne in mind. At the beginning of the 1990s, as ITU Deputy Secretary-General, Roberto Blois, pointed out in a recent speech, only 12 Member States had established an independent regulatory agency. By the end of the decade, that number had increased to more than 90 and continues to grow. Additionally, countries are witnessing a veritable explosion in the growth of mobile communications, at the same time that the evolution of technological convergence is signalling an imminent multimedia revolution. All of this must be added to the equally revolutionary introduction of digital technology, which developing countries are now able to adopt on an equal footing with many developed countries. The times have changed.

ITU should continue to perform its role as the intergovernmental institution with the broadest representation among countries of all continents

In this new scenario, it is not only logical, but necessary that ITU be prepared to act now, and more importantly in the very near future, in order that the institution so essential to preserving the harmony of telecommunications throughout the world is not left in a position where it is dragged along by events. This warning derives from my experience in directing a regulatory agency that, mutatis mutandis, discharges institutional duties and functions at a national level that are similar to those carried out worldwide by the one hundred and thirty-five year-old ITU.

One point is indisputable: ITU is the appropriate, credible and sole international forum for establishing rules and procedures that have permitted nations to share the radio-frequency spectrum and orbital resources harmoniously. Perhaps more importantly, ITU has a real capability to respond to challenges. This is evidenced by its success in defining the radio interfaces for the promising IMT-2000 system, as well as by other projects that are of interest to Member States. Moreover, ITU is recognized as the organization that has contributed the most to fostering and implementing measures aimed at reducing the telecommunications gap between developed and developing countries.

I ought to highlight ITU's enormous importance, especially to those developing countries that do not yet have the resources and technical capabilities to join and participate in the discussions of other forums in which significant telecommunication matters are addressed. For all these reasons, I feel confident in asserting that ITU should continue to perform its role as the intergovernmental institution with the broadest representation among countries of all continents. Within this context, the Brazilian Government recommends that reforms be carried out in a selective manner and at points identified as critical, principally those arising from the changes connected with the growth of regulatory agencies, the evolution of competition among operating companies, and the increasing participation of private companies in the telecommunications business throughout the world. In other words, I view the complete structural reorganization of ITU as unnecessary, and superficial change as meaningless. I believe, instead, that any changes should be carried out on a level that is sufficient to adequately meet and fulfil the challenges that lie before the organization.

Another area of the reform process in which Brazil would like to see improvements concerns certain measures adopted by ITU. Take the process of developing and approving technical recommendations for the provision of services and equipment, for example. These recommendations have been an important part of the work done by ITU's Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T) and, for this reason, their processing procedures should be perfected. After all, in addition to the other benefits they have brought, these technical recommendations or guidelines have enabled the interconnection of equipment of varying origins and from different manufacturers.

In short, technical recommendations have become such important instruments in the construction of the global public telecommunications network that current ITU-T procedures for their development and approval need to be reviewed immediately and, if possible, improved in relation to those established at the World Telecommunication Standardization Assembly (WTSA-2000) in Montreal last September-October. Such a review is made all the more urgent by the dynamic nature and complexity of the standards required today and the need to develop them in increasingly shorter periods of time. In the course of this important review, the group charged with reforming current procedures should examine the matter exhaustively and without any preconceived bias against bold ideas and proposals. What we are asking for, in summary, is that those responsible for the reform process consider the decisions of WTSA-2000 and, in so doing, pave the way for measures that can satisfy the reasonable claims of ITU Member States and of the telecommunications industry throughout the world.

The Brazilian Government is also concerned about the delays in processing notifications for satellite networks. Hopefully, ITU will, during its reorganization process, heed the just demand voiced by satellite operators: namely, that they be granted reasonable time periods within which to conclude the procedures for coordinating their satellite networks. Such periods should also be compatible with the terms under which these operators are required to complete commercial procedures for the procurement and launching of their satellites. We recommend that the Working Group on ITU Reform (WGR) examine new instruments which the Union could use, including the contracting of third parties to undertake various activities, to develop the software needed to resolve the backlog problem. In any event, the backlog issue must be resolved in the near term, even if this requires increasing the number of staff in ITU's Radiocommunication Bureau.

I recognize that those responsible for the reform process will face yet another challenge. That of identifying the advantages and disadvantages of maintaining the current federative system embodied in ITU's Constitution and Convention, and which provides for a General Secretariat and three Bureaux. There is no question, however, of the need to make the election process in the Plenipotentiary Conferences more efficient and to identify and specify, in the Convention, the functions discharged by the Deputy Secretary-General. It is unacceptable that such valuable human resource be wasted on secondary functions or functions that could be delegated to others within ITU's structure.

In addition, the Brazilian Government believes in — and has supported — initiatives aimed at preparing conferences in regional forums. We believe that these initiatives can serve to clarify the issues to be debated and, in this way, provide the opportunity to elaborate proposals on which there is consensus.

There is one other significant matter that must be considered in the reform process: the financial and budgetary aspects of reform. Brazil supports adherence to the strict linkages between the strategic, operational and financial plans adopted by the organization. We believe this course of action will allow ITU to fulfil its programmes 

The Brazilian Government is concerned about the delays in processing notifications for satellite networks. Hopefully, ITU will, during its reorganization process, heed the just demand voiced by satellite operators

within the limits of the available resources. For this reason, the organization needs to study the desirability of replacing the policy that establishes a ceiling on expenditures with one that prohibits exceeding the amount of total resources available while maintaining, at the same time, the contribution levels adopted at the last Plenipotentiary Conference (Minneapolis, 1998).

In sum, these are the points we would like to put forward for consideration. The objective is to contribute to the on-going discussions that will precede the reform of ITU. I am quite certain that these subjects will deserve the special attention of the participants in the fourth meeting of WGR, due to take place from 2 to 6 April 2001 in the Brazilian city of Salvador. The Brazilian Government is honoured to host this event and will spare no effort to provide the support and facilities necessary to ensure its success.

Back to top