3 Mins Read
ADNews-Monrovia,Liberia: Questions are mounting over the Liberia Telecommunications Authority’s (LTA) handling of information concerning NUMBTEL, as repeated inquiries have reportedly failed to produce basic details about the company’s office location and management structure.
By Contributing Writer
The apparent difficulty in obtaining information about NUMBTEL is raising concerns about transparency, accountability and regulatory oversight within Liberia’s telecommunications sector.
According to information gathered by Smart News Liberia, several inquiries have been made to LTA officials seeking basic information about NUMBTEL, including the location of its office and details about the individuals responsible for managing the company.
However, despite the inquiries, officials have reportedly failed to provide a clear location for NUMBTEL’s office or furnish details about its managerial structure as of the time of going to press.
A communication was sent to the head of Communication of LTA, madam Jarce Burphy last week. She requested an email be sent to her for submission to relevant department for response. However, at the time of going to press, there was no response.
The development raises a fundamental question. How can basic information about a telecommunications entity remains difficult to obtain from the very regulator responsible for overseeing the sector?
The LTA is responsible for regulating Liberia’s telecommunications industry, including licensing operators, monitoring compliance and enforcing regulatory requirements. The regulator’s responsibilities therefore make access to information about licensed or regulated entities particularly important.
The inability of officials to provide basic information about NUMBTEL risks creating the perception that the company is being treated differently from other entities operating within the telecommunications sector.
It also raises questions about whether NUMBTEL has fully met the regulatory requirements expected of telecommunications operators and whether the LTA is adequately monitoring its operations.
The issue becomes more concerning if the regulator is unable or unwilling to clearly identify the company’s physical presence, management structure and regulatory status.
For a telecommunications regulator, information such as a company’s registered office, authorized activities, principal officers and licensing status should ordinarily be readily available within its regulatory records.
The questions surrounding NUMBTEL therefore go beyond the company itself and touch directly on the effectiveness and transparency of the LTA’s regulatory system.
The LTA should clarify whether NUMBTEL is a duly licensed or authorized entity, what services it is permitted to provide, where its registered or operational office is located, who its principal officers are, and which department within the LTA is responsible for supervising its activities.
The regulator should also explain why repeated inquiries have reportedly failed to produce these basic details.
The failure to provide answers could fuel speculation that NUMBTEL is receiving preferential treatment or that information concerning the company is being deliberately withheld.
However, the allegation that the LTA is shielding NUMBTEL remains an allegation unless supported by evidence demonstrating deliberate protection or interference with regulatory oversight.
The LTA therefore has an opportunity to address the concerns directly by making the relevant information available and explaining its regulatory relationship with NUMBTEL.
Transparency from the regulator would help dispel questions surrounding the company and reassure the public that telecommunications operators are being treated fairly and subjected to the same regulatory standards.
For an institution entrusted with regulating one of Liberia’s most important sectors, the public should not have to struggle to obtain basic information about an entity operating under its oversight.
The questions are now before the LTA. Where is NUMBTEL’s office, who manages the company, what is its regulatory status, and why have officials repeatedly failed to provide these details?
Comments are closed.