VAN DER VLIESISTOTER/LUBACH Post and telecommunications 7. General remarks Post and Telecommunications used to be a state monopoly. Several Acts gradually privatise them, under guidance of the minister of Traffic and Water affa irs and the OPTA, Independent Post and Telecommunication Authority. This Board is in charge of reguating the Dutch postaland telecommunications markets. OPTA is an agency independentand trusted with public lawauthority. The OPTA Act regulates its duties and powers. The minister of Traffic is partly accountable for the activities of OPTA, though cannot force it to take a decision 7.2 Reasons The Post and Telecommunication market has been privatised to obta in a better and more up to date service ably in the field of Telecomm unications no public interest was prohibitive for the transformation into the open market The Parliament demanded the creation of the OPTA, by wishing an independe board of supervision, in order to guarantee separation between national politics and the execution of supervision. The separation between the function of the state and the function of the board of supervision was also desirable, because the state is an mportant shareholder in various companies. European competition la walso requires an independent board of supervision Furthermore the installation of the Board promotes democratic legitim isation and legal certainty. It should be noticed that a specal democratic legit imisation is not needed in this case, while the service itself is not tied to government administration by nature. The technical status only was the source of the monopolised state market It is a public interest to guarantee the privacy of the communications via the net works or the post. For the enforcement of the protection of privacy, a minister is still accountable by law. The law sets also rules for the responsibilities for the companies in this respect. Thus the regulation provides a typical mixture of private and pub responsibility he general adm inistrative aw Act is applicable to the actions of the OPtA. s also in that respecta democratic basis is guaranteed. One of the provisions of this Act holds the obligation to weigh the interests of the interested pa rties. This weighing should be dor principle of legal certa inty. The aforementioned regards the relations between the state and the OPTA. As faras the customer is concemed, legal certa inty can be found in the supervision of the OPTA on the companies. The OPTA functions as a watchdog for the development of prices. Especally it forces the Holder of the network to give way to the companies on base of proportionality. Thus also the OPTA is creating the basis for reasona ble prices and equal shares of the telephoneVAN DER VLIES/STOTER/LUBACH 14 7 Post and Telecommunications 7.1 General remarks Post and Telecommunications used to be a state monopoly. Several Acts gradually privatise them, under guidance of the minister of Traffic and Water affairs and the OPTA, Independent Post and Telecommunication Authority. This Board is in charge of regulating the Dutch postal and telecommunications markets. OPTA is an agency, independent and trusted with public law authority. The OPTA Act regulates its duties and powers. The minister of Traffic is partly accountable for the activities of OPTA, though cannot force it to take a decision. 7.2 Reasons The Post and Telecommunication market has been privatised to obtain a better and more up to date service. Notably in the field of Telecommunications no public interest was prohibitive for the transformation into the open market. The Parliament demanded the creation of the OPTA, by wishing an independent board of supervision, in orderto guarantee a separation between national politics and the execution of supervision. The separation between the function of the state and the function of the board of supervision was also desirable, because the state is an important shareholder in various companies. European competition law also requires an independent board of supervision. Furthermore the installation of the Board promotes democratic legitimisation and legal certainty. It should be noticed that a special democratic legitimisation is not needed in this case, while the service itself is not tied to government administration by nature. The technical status only was the source of the monopolised state market. It is a public interest to guarantee the privacy of the communications via the networks or the post. For the enforcement of the protection of privacy, a minister is still accountable by law. The law sets also rules for the responsibilities for the companies in this respect. Thus the regulation provides a typical mixture of private and public responsibility. The General administrative law Act is applicable to the actions of the OPTA. So also in that respect a democratic basis is guaranteed. One of the provisions of this Act holds the obligation to weigh the interests of the interested pa rties. This weighing should be done in a reasonable way. This prescription offers a safeguard for the principle of legal certainty. The aforementioned regards the relations between the state and the OPTA. As far as the customer is concerned, legal certainty can be found in the supervision of the OPTA on the companies. The OPTA functions as a watchdog for the development of prices. Especially it forces the Holder of the network to give way to the companies on base of proportionality. Thus also the OPTA is creating the basis for reasonable prices and equal shares of the telephone numbers for the clientele of each company