A proposed acquisition of Belize’s second-largest telecommunications provider Speednet (SMART) by market leader Belize Telemedia Limited (BTL) has sparked significant regulatory and public debate regarding competition safeguards. The critical hurdle remains Section 19(5) of Belize’s Telecommunications Act, which mandates that no transfer of control can occur without prior written approval from the Public Utilities Commission (PUC).
Former PUC chairman John Avery, who led the regulator for over twelve years, has issued a stark warning that eliminating Belize’s only telecommunications competitor would fundamentally violate both the spirit and letter of the telecommunications law. Avery contends this acquisition would reverse decades of progress toward competitive markets and potentially trigger anti-competition penalties that could jeopardize operating licenses.
The political dimension adds complexity to the regulatory process. Prime Minister John Briceño has broken months of silence by characterizing the potential deal as a possible financial lifeline for BTL while maintaining official neutrality. However, the Prime Minister’s appointment authority over PUC commissioners and BTL’s board, combined with potential familial financial interests in the outcome, has raised concerns about procedural independence.
Current PUC Chairman Dean Molina offers a different legal interpretation, noting that the Telecommunications Act acknowledges various market structures through Section 26, including single-operator and dominant-operator scenarios. Molina clarifies that Section 42(4) regarding anti-competitive behavior doesn’t apply to merger approvals, making Section 19(5) the exclusive regulatory gateway.
As BTL actively lobbies business groups, unions, and social security authorities for support, broader societal institutions including business associations, religious organizations, and civil society groups are demanding transparency and caution. Senators have called for independent valuation assessments and warned against returning to de facto monopoly conditions. BTL maintains that no final decision has been made and commitments to adhere to both legal requirements and the PUC’s ultimate determination.