On a strictly legal basis, problems abound in the new telecom policy. This is not because the new policy is flawed but because the earlier policy has left a legacy of duopoly, and any change in that could be contested in courts. The issue of licence to new players, for example, would be in contravention of the commitments to existing licensees. It is thorny issues such as these which have resulted in the policy being referred to the attorney general.

But these problems are insurmountable only if viewed from the strictly legal angle. The ministry has to remember that the basic reason for telecom reform is not maximising revenues accruing to the government, nor to protect incumbent monopolies, but to lower the transaction costs in this vital sector. Good telecommunications can compensate to a great extent for other infrastructure problems, such as bad roads. A moderntelecommunications network forms the backbone for the computer software industry. The only aim of policy in this field is to reduce costs. And costs can be reduced only with increased competition. While there is no doubt that companies which had won the licenses on the old duopoly principle will object, especially those companies which have paid up their license fees, a flexible approach could have solved this problem. For instance, a reduction in fees could have been a trade-off for allowing new entrants. After all, hefty fees merely make communications more expensive. It is this attitude of give and take which is essential if we are to get out of the mess that we have made of our telecom policy.