By 
The nub of the argument GIBA had with the regulator NCA was its opposition to using conditional access as a mechanism for collecting revenues to finance the public broadcaster, Ghana Broadcasting Corporation (GBC): “The NCA wanted to put in a conditional access system to replace the revenue provided by the TV license law. But to do this they really needed to replace current policy and law. GIBA presented alternatives, including using a percentage of the current Communications Services tax. They didn’t accept our proposals.”
“The TV license law works on a levy on equipment, the TV itself. It doesn’t interfere with access to and distribution of content. There is not the legal basis for a conditional access decision that would block content from reaching people. We went to the Supreme Court on this constitutional argument as it would deprive people of the right to access content and this right is enshrined in the country’s constitution.”
According to GIBA’s announcement: “The High Court on Tuesday, 16th August 2022, delivered its ruling in favour of the Ghana Independent Broadcasters Association (GIBA) in a matter in which GIBA sought among other things, a judicial review in order to quash the decision of the National Communications Authority’s (NCA) establishment of its Minimum Requirements for the Reception of Digital Terrestrial and Satellite Television service it published in December 2019, in conformity with the Digital Terrestrial Television (DTT) Policy developed by the Ministry of Communications and Digitalisation, in so far as same sought to block the content of Free-to-Air (FTA) Digital Terrestrial Television broadcasters through the use of a Conditional Access System (CAS).”
“The Court held that, the Conditional (Controlled) Access System which the NCA has made a requirement, for the importation of television sets and set-top-boxes (decoders), to enable it impose and collect an electronic tax in the form of TV License Fees, in the absence of any substantive or subsidiary legislation to that effect, amounts to Jurisdictional Error by Excess of Jurisdiction. Hence, the provision made for the inclusion of Conditional Access System for Free-to-Air TV receivers was illegal and therefore quashed. One other key takeaway from the judgement is the emphasis on the continuous need for open and honest engagement with stakeholders to foster partnerships in formulating policies, not just for the media industry but in all other sectors, especially when policies that affect them are being developed.”
The major threat of conditional access for funding the public broadcaster is that it would hit audiences for all FTA broadcasters as it would potentially reduce sales of set-top boxes. This would come at a bad time for local broadcasters as all have experienced drops in revenue, coming out of Covid-19 and the associated economic impact on the economy: “There are huge numbers of stations chasing a limited basket of revenue.” Some stations have not paid their staff for several months.
The digital transition is a work in progress. It was agreed that a PPP would be set up and that a table of fees – depending on the number of regions reached – would be agreed. Rates would be lower for remote sites and higher for those reaching more populous sites: “We’ve never got the rates from NCA and broadcasters were put on the platform on a trial basis for 4-5 years. It was supposed to go to the National Media Commission to determine directors and staff, to ensure fairness, neutrality and efficiency.”
However, the company was set up and the President made the appointments: “This is not acceptable. There are always problems when politicians appoint someone in the media.” Rates were proposed to some broadcasters at a meeting which GIBA was not invited to: “GIBA wants to be seated at the table. The broadcasters don’t all understand the dynamics, regulatory and technical.”
Comments