This document provides an overview and analysis of Lebanon's telecommunications policy. It discusses the history of the sector, the current regulatory framework, a proposed licensing regulation for internet service providers, and recommendations. Key points include that liberalizing the sector by increasing competition and privatizing bandwidth capacity could boost investment and internet access, but the government-owned company currently has unfair advantages over private ISPs. Overall, true reform is needed to develop Lebanon's telecommunications industry and close its digital divide.

1. A POLICY ANALYSIS PRESENTATION
FOR:
SCHOOLS ONLINE
Conducted by:
Lauren Moloney-Egnatios

2. OBJECTIVES
• Overview of the Issue
• Policy for analysis
• Strengths and Weaknesses
• Recommendations
• Implications

3. OVERVIEW OF THE ISSUE IN LEBANON’S
TELECOMMUNICATIONS SECTOR
Prior to 2002-2007 privatization efforts:
• Lebanese Government, Ministry of Telecommunications (MOT) held a monopoly over
domestic and international telecommuncations.
• The state owned company, Ogero, was responsible for purchasing, sale and supply
of all key ICT infrastructure, including internet services.
Outcome:
• Extremely inefficient internet service at high prices (due to centralized system).
• Low bandwidth capacities and availability.
• Low internet penetration in the country.
• Increased presence of illegal ISPs squeezing bandwidth capacity.

4. OVERVIEW OF THE ISSUE IN LEBANON’S
TELECOMMUNICATIONS SECTOR
• 2007 Ministry of Telecommunications establishes the
Telecommunications Regulatory Authority (TRA),an
“independent” public agency to liberalize, develop and regulate
the telecommunications sector.
Among other functions, the TRA:
• “d) organizes concessions, issues [service provider] Licenses,
ensures compliance with License terms and conditions,
monitors, amends, suspends and withdraws Licenses in
accordance with the provisions of the present Law and its
implementing decrees” (Telecommunications Law 431, 2002).

5. THE TRA WAS ESTABLISHED AS A
“WATCHDOG” AGENCY…..
…..But for whom?

6. 2009 DRAFT LAW: SERVICE PROVIDER
LICENSING REGULATION
Article 15, Section 1: Application for Class Licenses without Radio Frequency
“Any person wishing to apply for a class license without radio frequency must do
so in writing by submitting the information specified in Schedule D of this
regulation” [To be processed by the Telecommunications Regulatory Authority].
Article Objective:
• To establish formal application process and procedures for Internet Service
Providers (ISPs) to enter the telecommunications market with ease
• To encourages competition in the internet service provider industry
• To improve overall internet penetration by offering more ISPs.

7. 2009 DRAFT LAW: SERVICE PROVIDER
LICENSING REGULATION
Article 21, Section 1: Conditions in Licenses
“Service Provider Licenses may be granted subject to conditions. Any condition
must be in accordance with the Telecommunications Law, especially with regard
to promotion of competition, protection of Customers and the general public.”
Section 1c: Provisions in all licenses
[Conditions about the protection of users, quality of service, procedure for
complaints and disputes, publication of changes in access, tariffs, quality and
availability of services must be reported to TRA.]

8. TELECOMMUNICATIONS LAW 431
CURRENT LAW GOVERNING TELECOMMUNICATIONS SECTOR (2002):
Public Service Model Liberal Model with Public Interest Tradition
High Government Intervention: Low Government Intervention:
• Council of Ministers (with proposal • Allows service providers to set their
from MOT) determines TRA’s own rates and tariffs based on market
administrative and financial prices and conditions (article 28)
organization and appoints its
• Gives TRA the power to impose prices
Chairman and Members (article 4).
and tariffs on Service Providers in the
• MOT approves all decisions taken by case of monopoly pricing (article 28)
TRA (article 3).
• Sets the standard of quality for ISPs’
• Permits the TRA to collect revenue technical equipment (article 23)
from licensing applications and annual
fees (article 11)

9. 2009 DRAFT LAW: SERVICE PROVIDER LICENSING
REGULATION
Article 21, Section 1: Conditions for all licenses
Objective:
• To promote transparency between ISPs and TRA
• To improve accountability for quality and available internet services
• To establish the TRA as a “watchdog” of citizens interests
• To increase internet penetration rates in supplying quality service to users.

10. 2009 DRAFT LAW: SERVICE PROVIDER
LICENSING REGULATION
Strengths Weaknesses
• Low entry barriers for ISP licensing • Private companies are forced to
allows for private ISPs to enter the compete with the government owned
market with ease. company, Ogero, who has an unfair
advantage over key ICT infrastructure
• Improves transparency and
and equipment.
accountability between the
government, public and private sector. • Policy does not take into account
bandwidth capacity available for sale
• Increases competition in the service
to ISPs.
provider industry.
• Fails to set minimum bandwidth speed
• Absence of censorship and technical
that must be offered to customers.
filtering.

11. RECOMMENDATIONS
Schools Online Lebanon’s Government:
• Ban Ogero from withholding bandwidth
Until bandwidth capacities capacity from the market.
increase… • Provide private ISPs with same access
to key ICT infrastructure (such as DSL,
And competition between the cable, fixed telephone telephone lines)
government and private sector is on that the government has to promote
fair competition.
equal footing….
• Enforce minimum bandwidth speed
that ISPs must provide users.
• Incentivize (with lower monthly internet
• It is not recommended for costs) new educational businesses
Schools Online to establish and non-profit initiatives, like Schools
Online, that seek to increase internet
offices and Internet Learning connectivity in LB.
Centers in Lebanon.

12. IMPLICATIONS
Lebanon International Relations:
Consequence:
Consequence:
1. Less foreign investment interest; including
educational non-profits seeking to improve • International governments are aware of large
internet connectivity in public schools. discrepancy between written law and reality in
2. Telecommunications sector will never be truly Lebanon.
a liberal market until bandwidth capacities are
increased and privatized, and private ISPs • While foreign investments enjoy the same
have equal access to key ICT infrastructure. commercial liberties as domestic investments,
3. Persistence of digital divide between rural and operational costs will be higher for
urban population. international businesses requiring efficient
internet services.
Opportunity:
• Truly liberalizing the telecommunications Opportunity:
sector would provide jobs to the thousands of • High incentives from TRA for foreign
highly educated and skilled Lebanese
workforce in need of employment. entrepreneurs in information services to form
international-local partnerships.
• Lebanon could be a regional ICT powerhouse
in the future!

13. THANK YOU!
If you have additional questions, please see the full policy analysis report at
the following address:
http://lebanoncommunicationspolicy.wordpress.com/summary/