Commercial Court Division
a number +256 477 xxx would be treated as a local call and a call from MTN to +256
477 xxx would still be a local call.
This is a process she referred to as “housing”.
The code +256 477 xxx was for
Uganda and UTL. Therefore Gemtel having the code +256 477 xxx was part of the
UTL network. In his evidence, PW1 testified that UTL had been assigned by UCC the
digits 477 xxx to Northern Uganda and so for example digits 476 xxx was for Arua,
473 xxx was for Lira and 471 xxx was for Gulu all of which was local traffic. There
was no logic therefore for traffic to 477 xxx (Gemtel) to be International traffic.
Counsel for MTN submitted that the guiding principle behind interconnection is
reciprocity for like and like traffic.
I was referred to Reg. 17 of The
Telecommunications (Interconnection) Regulations SI No. 25 of 2005 which provides
“…
(1)
Each
compensation
interconnects
arrangements
provider
for
shall
transport
establish
and
reciprocal
termination
of
telecommunication traffic with any interconnect seeker …”
Counsel for MTN submitted that the principle of reciprocity is offended by UTL
charging USD 0.5 cents yet for the same service MTN was to pay UShs. 100.
UTL
Counsel for UTL asked court to dismiss the evidence of PW 2 as unreliable.
He
submitted that the evidence of DW1 emphasized that the digits 477 xxx pursuant to
the permission of the Government of Uganda operated only in and out of Southern
Sudan and could not operate inside Uganda.
The traffic to 477 xxx was Gemtel traffic in Southern Sudan and did not terminate on
the UTL network and this was illustrated in the traffic flow diagram Exhibit D. 29.
HCT - 00 - CC - CS- 297- 2008
/20