Lastly, Vodafone takes the view that the request, as set out, does not change the substantial nature of rights of use, nor does it create comparative advantages, and the company naturally agrees with it, as holder of the respective rights of use. For this reason, under paragraphs 3 and 4 of article 20 of ECL, such request does not necessarily require a public consultation, although Vodafone does not oppose to such a procedure, in case ICP-ANACOM deems it to be appropriate.
However, ANACOM considers that the decision on the request fo
alteration submitted by Vodafone has a significant impact on the market; in addition, the situation of other operators that obtained UMTS licenses under similar conditions as Vodafone must be taken into account.
In fact, in observance of the principles of impartiality and proportionality, there is no reason why NOS and MEO should be treated differently; consequently, in case these companies also apply for an extension of the period of validity of the respective RUF, namely in the scope of the assessment of this draft decision, such request shall be decided in the same line, according to the date of effective start of operation of the respective UMTS systems.
In this regards, and as referred above, in its application, Vodafone admitted that the amendment of the date of expiry applies to all Portuguese mobile electronic communications operators, as the situation that determined the impossibility of commercial operation of frequencies for 15 years affected the whole market in a similar way.
In this context, and as referred in point 1. BACKGROUNDhttps://www.anacom.pt/render.jsp?categoryId=384828, the draft decision which preceded this decision was submitted to a general consultation procedure provided for in article 8 of CAP, as well as to the prior hearing of stakeholders, under the prior CAP.
