Editorial | Ride-share fiasco

Unsurprisingly to this newspaper, the Government ran into a legal roadblock with its move to ban ride-hailing apps in Jamaica.

As we suggested that might be the case when the ban was announced nearly a fortnight ago, the island’s telecommunications service providers have told Daryl Vaz, the transport minister, that he has no power to order them to remove the apps from their networks.

That the minister has had to retreat, and the administration forced to reassess its options, is an embarrassment to the government that reeks of impetuosity and of an amateurish approach to policymaking and implementation. This could have been avoided with a little bit of homework.

The handling of the ban, however, is emblematic of how the government has gone about the matter of regulating the ride-share business in Jamaica, reactive, with insufficient thought, too little focus, and of even less clarity.

To be clear, this approach preceded Mr Vaz, who has held the portfolio for public transportation for only a year. Ride-hailing services, in particular, the global pioneer of the business, the American firm Uber, has been available in Jamaica since 2021. That was three years after the company signalled its intention to come to the island and the then transportation minister, Robert Montague, told domestic taxi operators that they would have to “up their game”.

With ride-sharing operations, anyone with a vehicle can offer rides to passengers, once they sign up with the service provider. The commuter requests the service via an app, gets the name and description of the driver ahead of pick-up, and pays for the ride online via a pre-registered debit or credit card.

GREY AREA

However, in Jamaica all public passenger operators and drivers are supposed to register with the industry’s regulator, the Transport Authority. Their vehicles have to be specifically licensed. This places the bulk of ride-share operators in a grey area, which has for several years spawned debate over how the business should be regulated.

Mr Vaz announced his ban on the apps, to last a year, on June 4, following the discovery of the body of a young female teacher, who had been missing for three weeks, having left home for work, apparently in a ride-share taxi. The driver suspected of the teacher’s murder, according to the police, was previously convicted for a sex offence.

Although in his parliamentary announcement Mr Vaz couched his ban as “recommendation”, he had in fact written to the telecoms providers, Cable and Wireless (Flow) and Digicel, directing them to, with immediate effect, “restrict access to all ride-hailing applications via its network”.

But as this newspaper observed at the time, under Jamaica’s Telecommunications Act, at Section 56, “the Minister responsible for national security may, where he is satisfied that it is necessary to do so in the interest of national security and after consultation with the Minister, take control of or close down a licensee’s operations or any part thereof”.

The implication of this is that despite Mr Vaz also having responsibility for telecommunications, the right of action in directing the removal of the apps from telecommunications networks would rest with the national security minister, Horace Chang.

According to Mr Vaz, only one of the telecommunications firms responded to his letter, and that was nearly a week after his directive.

However, the minister disclosed that “in discussions, both have indicated an unwillingness to block the apps on the basis that there is no legislation in place”.

Added Mr Vaz, “I feel very strongly that any minister of government who sees or deems an issue as a national security risk, that that legislation should be in place, and it should be clear and definitive that it is an instruction and an order, not a request”.

That may well be a basis on which to proceed with his proposed amendments to the Telecommunications Act. But on its face, it was not a lack of legislative authority that is at the root of this fiasco. Rather, it is how Mr Vaz attempted to instigate his purported ban.

An important lesson here is about the rule of law, and the importance of adhering thereto, if Jamaica intends to continue as a democratic, rules-based society. The alternatives are either anarchy or authoritarian power.

As he absorbs this lesson and learns from it, Mr Vaz should press the Transport Authority to accelerate its efforts at creating a credible regulatory framework in which the ride-share entities can operate.