[ad_1]
Claro and Entel fought a fierce battle with the undersecretariat of telecommunications (Subtel), after the latter released a resolution to freeze the 3.5Ghz band's concessions to conduct tests to develop 5G technology.
On Tuesday, Claro filed an appeal in the Court of Appeal against the owner of the Subtel, Pamela Gidi, who seeks to prevent her from continuing the suspension measure, deeming it illegal and arbitrary.
"The action deduced is intended to secure the urgent protection of Claro's constitutional rights and guarantees in the face of Subtel's grave breaches when Resolution No. 1.289 was released (with which it freezes the band of 3, 5 Ghz), "presentation of the telecommunications company resource.
Entel was not far behind, and a few minutes later the lawyers Cristóbal Eyzaguirre and José Miguel Huerta a legal remedy with the same purpose: to restrict the resolution of Gidi, considered the Diario Financiero.
To appeal, Claro has the services of lawyers Julio Pellegrini, Francisco Blavi and Pedro Rencoret of Pellegrini & Cia.
In particular, there are seven points with which Claro justifies the appeal: [19659002] 1. "The Exempt Resolution was dictated by an agency that is not competent to modify or modify the concessions telecommunications. "
2. "The Exempt Resolution (ER) was issued without having followed the procedure established by law, indeed, the respondent ordered the indefinite suspension of services, omitting properly the imputation procedure that should have been to be applied if it considered that there was an infringement in the use of the concession by Claro. "
3. "The ER intends to amend the essential elements of the concessions granted to Claro by means of an inadequate and absolutely irrelevant legal instrument (resolution) … in the circumstances where the only valid instrument for establishing the conditions of 39, access, exploitation and exploration of a concession is a supreme decree, which must also have been the subject of a decision before the Comptroller General. "[19659002] 4. "The RS is illegal and arbitrary because it has imposed a sanction that is not established by law."
5. "The ER is also illegal and arbitrary because it has no legal and factual basis and that it is absolutely insufficient in terms of motivation."
6. "The ER has seriously violated the principle of reason and proportionality in the Constitution, because the measures imposed by the under-secretary are unnecessary and completely excessive for the purposes of the" study "that has taken place.
disrupts and / or threatens the important rights and guarantees guaranteed by the Constitution. "
<! – Download the attached document of this news ->
[ad_2]
Source link
