(June 27, 2012, Addis Ababa, mfs News)--The technical phrase, Voice over
Internet Protocol (VoIP), literally the use of free or paid telephony service
over the Internet, has created a considerable media buzz over the past couple
of weeks in news coverage of Ethiopia.
As the news was
carried by some major media institutions, including Al Jezeera and the BBC, as
well as the more usual offenders, this was sufficient for some to claim that
the country had moved further in a downward spiral into areas where its
inhabitants are incarcerated incommunicado. Gallons of ink were spilt over the
week to declare Ethiopia as a place where freedom to receive and impart
information had been curtailed in a most absolute form.
The news went viral
with the assistance of the usual social media commentators who seldom bother to
check their sources or their information. Self-proclaimed cabals of human
rights advocates were quick to label this “eerie” proclamation as the last nail
in the coffin of freedom of information. Indeed, the backlash of violent
comment from various quarters was shocking, if not entirely surprising, in
terms of its magnitude and its fervor to jump onto this extensive smear
campaign bandwagon. It is something that has, after all, happened before.
There is only one problem with all of
these claims and comments: the whole story is quite simply untrue. Despite all
the assumptions made that this was a ‘done deal’, the fact is that the
allegations are simply false in their entirety. The whole story, and its
ramifications, is a very clear example of the recklessness of journalists who
failed to check even the most basic fact about the alleged proclamation.
And
that is that the alleged law has not even been considered by the relevant
parliamentary committee let alone enacted as law. All that has happened is that
a draft version was tabled for discussion. This, it might be noted, means that
any changes to unclear provisions can still be made, as can outright changes or
revisions.
Secondly, it is also apparent from a
reading of the draft (something that few if any commentators appear to have
bothered to do) that it does not actually ban usage of voice internet protocol
services. Irrespective of possible revisions, the draft proclamation itself
doesn’t make any such suggestion and it is hard to see how this can be deduced
from the draft.
The draft doesn’t suffer from the usual legal problems of
obfuscation and lack of clarity. It is actually plain even to the most untrained
eye. The draft’s relevant article 10(3) doesn’t prevent the use of VoIP for
personal use. It is all about the use of internet telephony for commercial purposes.
The wording of the
article which includes references to “whosoever provides” and “five times the
revenue” are a clear indication that the provision is aimed to regulate usage
of Internet services for commercial use in places known as “Internet cafes”.
The provision is, in fact, intended to control service providers, many of whom
operate without paying taxes for the revenues generated through these services.
“Article 10 (3). Whosoever provides
telephone call or fax services through the internet commits an offence and
shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment from 3 to 8 years and with fine
equal to five times the revenue estimated to have been earned by him during the
period of time he provided the service.
10 (4) Whosoever intentionally or by
negligence obtains the service stipulated under sub-article (3) of this Article
commits an offence and shall be punishable with imprisonment from 3 months to 2 years and with fine from
Birr 2,500 to Birr 20,000”
It is quite clear that these two
articles refer to the provision of a business providing telephone calls or fax
services over the Internet. It might be added that the legality of banning the
independent provision of telephony services is hardly a matter of dispute.
The
state-owned organization, Ethio Telecom has the unquestioned legal authority
over the provision of telephony and Internet services. Any Internet service
provision unauthorized by Ethio Telecom is illegal. Nor, it might be added, is this anything new.
It was banned by law nearly a decade ago, though there have, in any case, been
no reports of any prosecutions from that legislation.
In other words the stories and rumours
of the last two or three weeks are, to use a fine Americanism, just plain
hogwash, no more, no less.
No comments:
Post a Comment