THE EDITOR, Sir:
IN THE Gleaner of Monday, April 1, a letter from Mr. Marvin Gayle took issue with the Office of Utilities Regulation (OUR) for what he understood to be its position on the legality of the Yap Jack.
Mr. Gayle does not understand why a Yap Jack distributor should need to obtain a license to market the device. The answer is simply that the Yap Jack falls within the type of equipment affected by a Prescription Order gazetted by the Minister of Industry, Commerce and Technology on February 6, 2002.
Under that Ministerial Order "any equipment, which when used to make telephone calls, (a) circumvents the international network of a licensed international voice carrier; or (b) does not use the services of a licensed service provider" was designated as "prescribed equipment".
Section 9 (1) (c) of the Telecommunications Act 2000 (the Act) stipulates that a person may not sell, trade in or import any prescribed equipment unless that person is the holder of a dealer licence. Since no such licence has yet been issued, any person importing or selling Yap Jacks will be in breach of the law. Computer equipment whose primary use is not to provide voice services is specifically excluded from the order.
The service provided by the Yap Jack is unquestionably a telecommunications service as defined in Section 2 of the Act. As that definition is fairly lengthy I will not duplicate it here, but if Mr. Gayle does not have access to the Act I would suggest that he visit our web site www.our.org.jm where he can view it in its entirety.
Finally, Mr. Gayle seems to be asking whether someone using a Yap Jack is committing an offence under the law. The OUR has never stated that use of the Yap Jack by a private individual is, in itself, an offence, nor have we ever instituted proceedings against anyone for owning or using such a device. It is clearly the persons who provide the services, that is, those to whom payments are made for the international calls, who flagrantly breach the law. Persons who respect the rule of law and would like to see that principle more widely adopted, might choose to refrain from patronising those illegal services.
I am, etc.,
WINSTON C. HAY
Director-General
Office of Utility Regulation
