The uncertainty of ABS CBN's existence must cease
Published Mar 5, 2020 12:00 am
PAPER VIEW
By DEAN MEL STA. MARIA
Dean Mel Sta. Maria
In the Philippines, a hierarchy of laws exists. The supreme law is the Constitution, followed by statutes enacted by Congress and signed by the President, and the last ones are administrative and executive acts like agency directives. Statutes cannot violate the Constitution. Administrative and executive acts cannot transgress both statutes and the Constitution.
Statutes are amended, repealed, and extended only by another statute.Also, the Civil Code’s article 8 provides that “judicial decisions applying or interpreting the laws or the Constitution shall form a part of the legal system of the land.” In this regard, the Supreme Court has ruled that radio and television stations require a statutory franchise before they can operate.
The ABS-CBN franchise to operate a television and radio was granted by a statute, Republic Act Number 7966, approved on March 30, 1995, and published on April 19, 1995. Section 6 thereof provides unconditionally that “the franchise shall be for a term of twenty-five (25) years from the date of effectivity of this Act.” Article 2 of the Civil Code commands that a statute’s date of effectivity is the date 15 days after its publication. It is a definitive period ending with a day-certain easily calculable. ABS-CBN’s franchise therefore took effecton May 4, 1995.
Unless extended or granted by a new congressional franchise, ABS-CBN’s last day is on May 4, 2020, 25 years after the law’s effectivity.
Extending a law’s effects can only be done by Congress or expressly delegated in law by Congress to an executive agency. An example is the 2009 Rental Control Law providing in Section 6 thereof that the Housing and Urban Development Council (HUDC) is granted “the authority to continue the regulation of the rental of certain residential areas.” The HUDC has exercised this legislative empowerment a number of times.
Significantly, Section 6 of the ABS-CBN legislative franchise does not provide a similar provision delegating to any government agency, such as the National Telecommunication Commission (NTC), the power to extend the ABS-CBN franchise or its effects. Therefore only Congress can make the extension/renewal by statute. Also, a joint congressional resolution is not a statute. Neither can an arrangement, such as a memorandum of agreement, confer power to any agency to grant extensions/renewals.
There is a need for the House of Representatives and the Senate to come up with a new bill to be signed by the President prior to May 4, 2020 renewing the ABS- CBN franchise. It can be exactly worded as the previous one. There is still time to do this.
If this is not done, it will be the non-event giving justification for the quo warranto case initiated by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) in the Supreme Court.
A quo warranto case is filed against a usurper. This means an entity (or a person) which, from the beginning, has no right to hold office or to operate a franchise. When the OSG filed the quo warrant case, ABS-CBN had a valid franchise from the start. If ABS-CBN subsequently committed violations, the agency or tribunal to ventilate them should be the NTC or some lower courts but not the Supreme Court. Absence of jurisdiction makes the quo warranto dismissible.
However, without any statutory renewal by May 5, 2020, ABS-CBN will have no right to operate. If it will continue, ABS-CBN will be technically usurping a franchise. This supervening fact will strengthen OSG’s quo warranto case which, from a jurisdictional perspective, will metamorphose from a bad one to a good one.
Will press freedom be negatively affected by the uncertainty of a franchise renewal? I believe so. ABS-CBN has delivered quality news, commentaries, investigative programs, and human interest stories keeping the people informed of domestic and international affairs. Derailment will be a disservice to the country. Not that ABS-CBN should be accorded arbitrary congressional preference in franchise renewals, but, throughout the years, it has earned its stature as a reliable medium of free expression to merit urgent consideration.
A franchise may be a privilege, but when it enhancesa higher value in the exercise of our democratic rights, it deserves immediate attention. In making a decision, Congress must know that constitutional factors must always trump President Duterte’spersonal grievances. His individual interest must not be equated with national interest, his disappointment with mass frustration, his anger with public discontent and his hurt-pride with damage to the republic. The uncertainty of ABS-CBN’s existence must not rest on these delusions.
Dean Mel Sta. Maria
In the Philippines, a hierarchy of laws exists. The supreme law is the Constitution, followed by statutes enacted by Congress and signed by the President, and the last ones are administrative and executive acts like agency directives. Statutes cannot violate the Constitution. Administrative and executive acts cannot transgress both statutes and the Constitution.
Statutes are amended, repealed, and extended only by another statute.Also, the Civil Code’s article 8 provides that “judicial decisions applying or interpreting the laws or the Constitution shall form a part of the legal system of the land.” In this regard, the Supreme Court has ruled that radio and television stations require a statutory franchise before they can operate.
The ABS-CBN franchise to operate a television and radio was granted by a statute, Republic Act Number 7966, approved on March 30, 1995, and published on April 19, 1995. Section 6 thereof provides unconditionally that “the franchise shall be for a term of twenty-five (25) years from the date of effectivity of this Act.” Article 2 of the Civil Code commands that a statute’s date of effectivity is the date 15 days after its publication. It is a definitive period ending with a day-certain easily calculable. ABS-CBN’s franchise therefore took effecton May 4, 1995.
Unless extended or granted by a new congressional franchise, ABS-CBN’s last day is on May 4, 2020, 25 years after the law’s effectivity.
Extending a law’s effects can only be done by Congress or expressly delegated in law by Congress to an executive agency. An example is the 2009 Rental Control Law providing in Section 6 thereof that the Housing and Urban Development Council (HUDC) is granted “the authority to continue the regulation of the rental of certain residential areas.” The HUDC has exercised this legislative empowerment a number of times.
Significantly, Section 6 of the ABS-CBN legislative franchise does not provide a similar provision delegating to any government agency, such as the National Telecommunication Commission (NTC), the power to extend the ABS-CBN franchise or its effects. Therefore only Congress can make the extension/renewal by statute. Also, a joint congressional resolution is not a statute. Neither can an arrangement, such as a memorandum of agreement, confer power to any agency to grant extensions/renewals.
There is a need for the House of Representatives and the Senate to come up with a new bill to be signed by the President prior to May 4, 2020 renewing the ABS- CBN franchise. It can be exactly worded as the previous one. There is still time to do this.
If this is not done, it will be the non-event giving justification for the quo warranto case initiated by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) in the Supreme Court.
A quo warranto case is filed against a usurper. This means an entity (or a person) which, from the beginning, has no right to hold office or to operate a franchise. When the OSG filed the quo warrant case, ABS-CBN had a valid franchise from the start. If ABS-CBN subsequently committed violations, the agency or tribunal to ventilate them should be the NTC or some lower courts but not the Supreme Court. Absence of jurisdiction makes the quo warranto dismissible.
However, without any statutory renewal by May 5, 2020, ABS-CBN will have no right to operate. If it will continue, ABS-CBN will be technically usurping a franchise. This supervening fact will strengthen OSG’s quo warranto case which, from a jurisdictional perspective, will metamorphose from a bad one to a good one.
Will press freedom be negatively affected by the uncertainty of a franchise renewal? I believe so. ABS-CBN has delivered quality news, commentaries, investigative programs, and human interest stories keeping the people informed of domestic and international affairs. Derailment will be a disservice to the country. Not that ABS-CBN should be accorded arbitrary congressional preference in franchise renewals, but, throughout the years, it has earned its stature as a reliable medium of free expression to merit urgent consideration.
A franchise may be a privilege, but when it enhancesa higher value in the exercise of our democratic rights, it deserves immediate attention. In making a decision, Congress must know that constitutional factors must always trump President Duterte’spersonal grievances. His individual interest must not be equated with national interest, his disappointment with mass frustration, his anger with public discontent and his hurt-pride with damage to the republic. The uncertainty of ABS-CBN’s existence must not rest on these delusions.