Photo/Illutration KDDI Corp. President Makoto Takahashi, second from left, Softbank Corp. President Junichi Miyakawa, third from left, and Hiroshi Mikitani, right, chairman and CEO of Rakuten Group Inc., attend a news conference to present their opposition to the ruling Liberal Democratic Party’s proposal to scrap the Law on Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corp., etc. in Tokyo’s Chuo Ward on Dec. 4. (Shinya Matsumoto)

The ruling Liberal Democratic Party worked out a proposal in December to call for scrapping the Law on Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corp., etc. (NTT Law) in 2025.

While it is understandable that the law should be reviewed in keeping pace with the times, any changes to the legislation should make it a basic premise to warrant fair competition among carriers without causing anxiety to the public or putting anyone at a disadvantage.

The authorities should listen to a broad range of public views and carefully discuss the matter.

The NTT Law was enacted when the former Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Public Corp. was privatized some four decades ago.

The law calls on NTT to fulfill a public role and obligates the telecommunications giant to disclose the results of its research and development and to provide universal landline phone services across Japan.

The LDP’s proposal said the obligation to disclose research results is hindering NTT from conducting joint studies with other companies and should therefore be scrapped.

The proposal also said the obligation to provide universal services should be expanded to cover other means of communication and be included in the Telecommunications Business Law, which regulates the entire industry, and the NTT Law should be abolished.

The telecommunications ministry is arranging to submit a bill for partially amending the NTT Law, including eliminating the research disclosure obligation, to the ordinary Diet session that opens later this month.

Ministry officials said an overall review of the legal setup will henceforth be discussed in the Information and Communications Council, which will work out a report as early as this coming summer.

The provisions on the disclosure of research results and on the means of universal services certainly need to be reviewed in accordance with socioeconomic changes.

But the obligation to provide universal services, in itself, has to do with ensuring that key communications infrastructure, which has a highly public nature, will be maintained.

The matter should be discussed amply in weighing a variety of advantages and disadvantages.

The LDP proposed a mechanism that would allow the government to designate a carrier that should provide communications services in an area where no carrier has voluntarily offered to provide similar services.

NTT has also released a “stance” statement saying it would be prepared to assume a similar duty of last resort if only a number of conditions were met, including the availability of assistance for the maintenance costs.

There are, however, deep-rooted concerns that a review of the provision could lead to declining services, including in areas undergoing depopulation.

The importance of communications services has once again been highlighted by the consequences of the latest Noto Peninsula earthquake, wherein protracted communications network failures have made it difficult to assess the scope of the damage and determine personal safety.

No measure should be taken that could undermine the public’s sense of security.

The NTT Law was partly intended to prevent NTT from becoming too big and to prompt rival companies to enter the market.

The existing regulations have likely been playing a certain role, given that the market of cellular communications is currently divided by three major carriers.

NTT, for its part, argues that the NTT Law should be scrapped. Its rivals, however, are opposed to a similar measure, which they say would strengthen NTT’s control over the market.

There should be more in-depth discussions, including analysis from expert viewpoints, on what kind of discipline there should be to warrant fair competition.

--The Asahi Shimbun, Jan. 14

Related News