Connect with us

Business

Tribunal upholds decision in LDI case | The Express Tribune

Published

on

Tribunal upholds decision in LDI case | The Express Tribune



ISLAMABAD:

The Competition Appellate Tribunal has upheld the Competition Commission of Pakistan’s (CCP) decision to penalise Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited (PTCL) and other Long Distance International (LDI) operators for entering into an anti-competitive International Clearing House (ICH) agreement. These companies have been directed to deposit the fine within 30 days.

The total turnover of PTCL and other LDI operators amounts to Rs11 billion and they have been directed to deposit 2% of the turnover within a month.

While upholding the CCP’s findings, the tribunal reduced the penalty from 7.5% to 2% of the turnover generated from ICH-related activity. It said that if the operators failed to deposit the penalty within 30 days, it would automatically reinstate the original 7.5% fine.

The ICH agreement, signed in 2012, routed all incoming international calls through a single gateway operated by PTCL as the head of LDI consortium. All other LDI operators assigned their termination rights to the consortium, and traffic and revenues were shared on a quota basis rather than through competition.

The arrangement fixed termination rates at around 8.8 US cents per minute, up from about 2 cents earlier, effectively eliminating competition and reducing consumer choice.

Data from the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) showed that the incoming call volume dropped 70%, from 1.9 billion minutes in September 2012 to 579 million minutes in February 2013. Despite the sharp decline in traffic, the LDI operators’ revenue surged 308%.

In April 2013, the CCP declared the ICH a cartel arrangement involving price fixing and market sharing. It imposed penalties of 7.5% of the annual turnover (approximately Rs11 billion) on each LDI operator and directed the PTA to restore competition to pre-ICH levels. The ICH policy was subsequently withdrawn in June 2014.

During proceedings, the LDI operators claimed they entered into the ICH agreement on directives from the Ministry of Information Technology (MOIT) and the PTA, arguing that non-compliance would have risked the loss of their licences. However, the tribunal found no genuine state compulsion and ruled that records showed that the LDI operators had lobbied themselves for the ICH policy.

The MOIT had no authority under the Telecom Act, 1996 to issue directives to the operators and its powers were limited to issuing policy directives to the PTA.

The tribunal noted that even if the directives had been given, the operators were fully aware that the ICH violated competition laws, as evidenced by their earlier application for exemption under Section 5 of the Competition Act. The agreement, it held, restricted competition, prevented new entrants and clearly fell within the CCP jurisdiction.

The ruling reaffirmed that the Competition Act, 2010 applies to all undertakings, including the regulators and government bodies. The tribunal stated that even the PTA could be held liable, if found guilty of restricting or reducing competition.

PTCL had argued that the CCP should have conducted an inquiry before issuing a show-cause notice. The tribunal rejected this, saying that an inquiry is not necessary in every case, particularly where facts are admitted. The LDI operators had already acknowledged the existence of the ICH agreement, which was the root cause of the violation.



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Business

Two ships hit near Strait of Hormuz as fears grow of oil price rises

Published

on

Two ships hit near Strait of Hormuz as fears grow of oil price rises



International shipping is said to have come to a standstill at the strait’s entrance, with fears of disruption already pushing up global oil prices.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Khamenei dead, Middle East on edge: What will be the implications of Trump’s ‘Epic fury’ on stock markets, gold & oil? – The Times of India

Published

on

Khamenei dead, Middle East on edge: What will be the implications of Trump’s ‘Epic fury’ on stock markets, gold & oil? – The Times of India


Experience shows markets often come to view geopolitical disruptions as temporary. (AI image)

The global markets are in for a phase of enhanced turmoil and uncertainty! The ongoing tensions in the Middle East after US and Israel’s strikes on Iran and Ali Khamenei’s death may have investors running for cover – looking for an asset class that is safer.During the night of February 27–28, the United States and Israel carried out joint aerial strikes on Iran as part of “Operation Epic Fury.” Statements by President Trump openly referring to regime change suggest that the confrontation could evolve into a prolonged campaign rather than remain a limited exchange, say market analysts at Franklin Templeton Institute.What does the situation mean for stock markets, energy markets (oil), gold and other asset classes? Here’s what Franklin Templeton Institute analysts have to say:From a market perspective, the key uncertainty is whether the conflict remains confined to direct military engagement or expands into disruptions affecting energy supplies and logistics networks, which would sustain a higher and more persistent risk premium.At the centre of the ongoing uncertainty from a global market and trade perspective is the Strait of Hormuz. While a complete blockade would carry severe consequences for Iran itself, the country has the capability to disrupt maritime traffic through tactics such as vessel harassment, seizures, drone activity, cyber operations, or the use of proxy forces.

Strait of Hormuz

Strait of Hormuz

The most immediate economic impact is expected in energy markets, where crude oil and natural gas prices are likely to move higher, they say. Such actions, feel analysts, will keep geopolitical risk premiums at high levels. In 2024, approximately 20 million barrels per day moved through the Strait of Hormuz, which is around one-fifth of global petroleum liquids consumption. Even a limited interference – which can be caused by delays, rerouting, or isolated seizure – can push prices higher through increased risk perception well before any actual shortages emerge.Liquefied natural gas should not be overlooked in this context. Qatar has the world’s third-largest LNG export capacity, and roughly one-fifth of global LNG shipments pass through the Strait of Hormuz, largely consisting of Qatari exports. As a result, shipping risks in the region affect gas markets as significantly as oil markets.Also Read | US-Israel strikes on Iran: How will India be hit by Strait of Hormuz closure? ExplainedShipping expenses have already begun to rise, with insurance costs acting as a major driver. Insurers have started issuing cancellation notices and revising war-risk premiums for voyages in the Gulf region. Some routes have reportedly seen premium increases of up to about 50%, while earlier periods of tension recorded rises exceeding 60% on important trade corridors. These developments effectively tighten supply conditions even when production levels remain unchanged.The possibility of the conflict spreading across the region is increasing. Franklin Templeton Institute analysts are of the view that across global financial markets, the immediate response to such shocks is usually driven by adjustments in risk perception rather than by underlying economic changes. “The initial market reaction for this type of event would typically see Treasury yields move lower and equities lower—mostly a risk-premium repricing. Impacts on activity/earnings may be delayed and uneven. The US dollar reaction is not guaranteed; gold tends to benefit while bitcoin has been trading like a risk asset (i.e., down with equities), reinforcing that it’s not typically a reliable hedge/diversifier in geopolitical drawdowns,” say Franklin Templeton Institute analysts.However, they note that experience shows markets often come to view geopolitical disruptions as temporary. Initial spikes in risk premiums are frequently followed by the realization that the overall effect on corporate profitability is limited. The duration of the conflict, developments in shipping and insurance costs, and the eventual resolution will be more important than the initial headlines.“We would not yet label this a clean buy-the-dip setup—duration, shipping/insurance mechanics, and the endgame matter more than the first headline,” they say.From an investment perspective, the near-term outlook favours sectors linked to energy markets, as well as companies benefiting from higher shipping and insurance costs, along with defence-related industries, the analysts say. At the same time, caution is warranted toward emerging markets that depend heavily on energy imports and toward cyclical sectors sensitive to fuel and logistics costs, including airlines and certain industrial segments.“For protection, we prefer oil upside/volatility structures and selective gold exposure over broad equity shorts—the path will be driven more by shipping/insurance reality than by the new cycle,” they conclude.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Crude oil prices in focus: OPEC+ increases output by 206,000 bpd amid Middle East tensions – The Times of India

Published

on

Crude oil prices in focus: OPEC+ increases output by 206,000 bpd amid Middle East tensions – The Times of India


OPEC+ on Sunday announced a higher-than-expected increase in oil production quotas, days after US and Israeli strikes on Tehran triggered Iranian retaliation across the Middle East, according to AFP.The oil producers’ group, which includes Saudi Arabia, Russia and several Gulf states affected by the escalation, said it had “agreed on a production adjustment of 206 thousand barrels per day”.“This adjustment will be implemented in April,” OPEC+ said in a statement.While the cartel did not directly refer to the Iran conflict, it cited “a steady global economic outlook and current healthy market fundamentals” as the rationale behind the output increase.The move comes amid heightened geopolitical tensions in the Middle East, a region critical to global crude oil supply.

-

The announcement did not directly reference the outbreak of the Iran conflict, instead attributing the decision to “a steady global economic outlook and current healthy market fundamentals”.Before the meeting, analysts had projected a more modest increase of 137,000 barrels per day.However, Jorge Leon, an analyst at Rystad Energy, cautioned that the agreed hike may not be sufficient to offset the potential impact of escalating tensions on crude oil markets.Leon highlighted the risk of disruption in the Strait of Hormuz, a critical waterway through which nearly a quarter of the world’s seaborne oil supplies transit.Iran’s Revolutionary Guards have reportedly contacted vessels to declare the strait closed. Iranian state television on Sunday said an oil tanker attempting to “illegally” pass through the strait was struck and was sinking, broadcasting footage of a burning tanker at sea.“If oil cannot move through Hormuz, an extra 206,000 barrels per day does very little to ease the market,” Leon said, adding that “logistics and transit risk matter more than production targets right now”.He said the OPEC+ move “is unlikely to calm markets”, noting that “prices will respond to developments in the Gulf and the status of shipping flows, not to a relatively small increase in output.”Apart from Russia and Saudi Arabia, the V8 group includes Kuwait, Oman, Iraq and the United Arab Emirates — all of which were targeted by Iranian attacks for a second consecutive day on Sunday. Algeria and Kazakhstan are also part of the group.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending