SA's mobile networks have yet to be fined for poor-quality network coverage by the Independent Communications Authority of SA (ICASA), but little transparency exists in the monitoring process, argue analysts.
The End-User and Subscriber Service Charter regulations, finalised in July 2009, call for operators to maintain 95% network service availability over a period of six months and an average of 3% or lower in connectivity failure rate. Failure to do so is supposed to result in a R500 000 fine.
However, ICASA has confirmed that to date no fines have been issued, saying it is continuously monitoring the mobile networks for adherence to the regulations.
“The authority is monitoring the quality of networks in terms of the regulations. The ICASA council met with mobile operators last year to address the issues of poor network standards and operators committed to improving these standards,” explains ICASA spokesperson Paseka Maleka.
According to Maleka, the authority follows the complaint handling process in these matters. “In terms of our complaints handling processes, complaints/matters relating to networks, quality of service, are investigated and we usually engage the licensee, before these matters are referred to the Complaints and Compliance Committee (CCC) for adjudication.
“This is the committee that has the powers to recommend fines or penalties after a formal hearing process has taken place. So far, no matter relating to non-compliance with these regulations has been referred to CCC for hearing and adjudication,” he continues.
These statements are in line with claims by the country's mobile operators that they are in full compliance with the regulations.
Big claims
Vodacom claims it comfortably exceeded the 95% network availability target and its connectivity failure rate was significantly lower than the stipulated minimum of 3%.
MTN makes similar claims: “The connectivity failure rate of the MTN network is well below the international minimum standard of 2% dropped calls,” notes Robert Madzonga, the chief corporate services officer at MTN SA.
Even third mobile operator Cell C, which publicly admitted and apologised recently for poor network coverage and dropped calls, claims it has exceeded the 95% network service availability threshold over a period of six months, in compliance with section 4.1 of the regulations.
Cell C's connectivity failure rate has also not exceeded the 3% threshold over a period of six months, in compliance with section 4.6 of the regulations, maintains the company.
But Fezekile Mashinini, business manager at BMI-TechKnowledge, remains sceptical about the claims: “Quality of mobile networks is normally measured across three factors, including coverage, accessibility, and audio quality.
“On the first factor, the mobile network operators have done well, with reported coverage approaching 100% of the population. There are issues with regards to accessibility, such as establishing and maintaining calls, in that some calls are dropped and in some instances establishing the call is an issue, so there is work to be done on that front. It is accepted though that problems can be 'area-specific', depending on the network loading,” he adds.
Thus, an essential requirement of the regulations is that ICASA must publish regular reports regarding the state of the networks and adherence to the quality criteria.
Trusting transparency
Maleka explains that over and above physical interaction with the network operators last year, the authority conducted a study on quality of service to determine compliance with the End User and Subscriber Service Charter Regulations.
“The three mobile operators, namely Vodacom, MTN and Cell C, were monitored using a global positioning system (GPS) of the Agilent Receiver during the drive test; and using Garmin Quest during the stationary monitoring.
“The wireless network monitoring software was set up to make calls on a one-on-one basis to the three networks so that the quality of the networks could be monitored. Monitoring was conducted in various areas in Gauteng. The findings of the report will be made available in due course,” he states.
Frost and Sullivan analyst Spiwe Chireka says the fact that the findings of the report have yet to be released is a reflection of the inefficiency and ineffectiveness of ICASA.
She argues that, while she is confident that the authority's monitoring of the networks is quite rigorous, the lack of transparency in the process and findings raise concerns about the extent to which ICASA is actively pushing mobile network quality in the country.
Chireka argues that the onus is on ICASA to report its findings to ensure peace of mind for the South African consumer.
She points out that the authority may be constrained as to how much of its findings can be made publicly available. However, earlier this year, ICASA noted that its compliance division is working on a manual to govern how these reports reach the surface.
As the body represented both the interests of the industry, as well as the consumer, it is ICASA's responsibility to communicate this information, concludes Chireka.
Share